Bounded authority: expanding ‘appropriate’ police behavior beyond procedural justice

This paper expands previous conceptualizations of appropriate police behavior beyond procedural justice. The focus of the current study is on the notion of bounded authority – i.e. acting within the limits of one’s rightful authority. According to work on legal socialization, US citizens come to acquire three dimensions of values that determine how authorities ought to behave: (a) neutral, consistent and transparent decision-making; (b) interpersonal treatment that conveys respect, dignity and concern; and (c) respecting the limits of one’s rightful power. Using survey data from a nationally representative sample of US adults, we show that concerns over bounded authority, respectful treatment, and neutral decision-making combine to form a strong predictor of police and legal legitimacy. We also find that legal legitimacy is associated with greater compliance behavior, controlling for personal morality and perceived likelihood of sanctions. We discuss the implications of a boundary perspective with respect to ongoing debates over the appropriate scope of police power and the utility of concentrated police activities. We also highlight the need for further research specifically focused on the psychological mechanisms underlying the formation of boundaries and why they shape the legitimacy of the police and law

Legitimating practices: revisiting the predicates of police legitimacy

Procedural justice theory predicts a relationship between police behaviour, individuals’ normative evaluation of police and decisions to comply with laws. Yet, prior studies of procedural justice have rather narrowly defined the potentially relevant predicates of police behaviour. This study expands the scope of procedural justice theory by considering a broad array of policing components, including unobserved actions such as electronic surveillance, respecting the limits of one’s legal authority, and the unequal or equal distribution of policing resources between different groups. Analysing data from a national probability sample of adults in England and Wales, we (1) present a comprehensive investigation of the heterogeneous elements of policing related to legitimacy judgments and (2) contribute to debate about the nature of legitimacy

Legal Socialization across the Spheres of Childhood and Adolescence

This part of the book examines the legal socialization process across three crucial domains. These domains are as follows: family and parents, schools and teachers, and legal institutions and authorities. The aim is to discuss the degree to which experiences with authority and rule-making and enforcement influence the acquisition of supportive legal values, formation of law-related attitudes, and development of legal reasoning competencies.</p

Legal Socialization in the Juvenile Justice System

Chapter 9 discusses legal socialization within the juvenile justice system. Adolescence is a developmental period during which many young people have contact with legal authorities, primarily the police. These contacts involve high levels of discretion for law enforcement, and studies show the manner in which that discretion is exercised has strong consequences for the subsequent orientations that adolescents have toward the law as well as their later law-related behavior. In particular, adolescents react to how fairly the authorities treat them. Juvenile justice is a particularly contentious area of policy with many punitive practices advocated in spite of evidence that they do not build legitimacy or reduce crime. On the other hand, experiencing justice is shown to promote legitimacy and lower offending.</p

Legal Socialization in the Family

The chapters in Part III take up the discussion of legal socialization across the spheres of childhood and adolescence. As they move through their early lives, children and adolescents pass through three spheres of authority: the family, the school, and the juvenile justice system. In each of these they can either experience coercive and consensual authority systems. Consensual systems promote the development of internal beliefs in the legitimacy of law and legal authority and because of such beliefs, encourage voluntary deference. Coercive systems lead to a risk orientation toward law, with people complying when the risk of being caught and punished is high.</p

General Approaches to Legal Socialization

Chapter 2 outlines two basic models of legal socialization. The coercive one is consistent with the way young children view authority as something that is to be obeyed or not depending upon the rewards and punishments. This framework can carry into adulthood. Legal socialization can also lead to a consensual relationship to law, which is based upon the belief that laws and legal authorities are legitimate and therefore ought to be obeyed. When people relate to law in this way they are less focused upon the rewards and costs of behavior and more upon responsibilities and obligations toward rules and authorities. This volume argues that the consensual model of authority are superior and more desirable. For this model to be viable, most people in society must become adults who relate to law in a value-based way and who regard authorities as being legitimate and thereby deserving of deference.</p

Legal Socialization and the Elements of Legitimacy

The chapters in Part I discuss the two basic models for understanding the relationship between people and law: coercive and consensual. The consensual model relies upon people’s willingness to obey laws because they think it is appropriate and proper to do so. The belief that law and legal authorities are legitimate and ought to be voluntarily obeyed develops during the childhood and adolescent socialization process. A coercive model of authority relies upon the use of force and credible threats of detection and punishment for rule-breaking to promote compliance. As children mature they move through three spheres of authority: family, school, and juvenile justice. In each sphere children and adolescents can develop the belief that the law is legitimate, and feel a duty to defer to law or they can come to view the law as coercive and comply out of fear of punishment.</p

Legal Socialization in the School

Chapter 8 focuses on schools. Traditionally schools sought to socialize children into the values they would need to have to be future citizens. More recently schools have been seen as institutions whose mission is skill acquisition, and the value socialization role has been minimized. Studies make clear that schools do shape values and that the type of classroom and school authority that children experience shapes the degree to which their initial consensual or coercive orientations toward rules strengthen or decline. If children experience transparency in the rules implemented by authorities they believe are concerned about them and their welfare, they increasingly define their relationship to rules as consensual and view the authorities as legitimate. Coercive approaches, in contrast, develop when these legitimating characteristics are absent. Coercive orientations are associated with higher levels of rule-breaking, bullying, gang activity, and criminal behavior. Despite these findings, recent developments in the school environment have increased the coerciveness of school environments.</p

Introduction

Legal scholars and social scientists studying the law recognize that a central issue in law is understanding why adults obey the law (Tyler, 2006a, 2011). Evidence suggests that law-related attitudes and values are central to motivating adult law-related behavior, and hence that it is important to understand how they develop during the process of legal socialization. Although this is true, legal scholarship has widely ignored the process of childhood and adolescent socialization. The lack of research on legal socialization is ironic in that by the time people become adults, their law-related attitudes and values are already well formed and they have often had formative personal experiences with legal authorities. This important development begins during childhood and adolescence as part of the overall process of socialization....</p

Neurological Development and Legal Competency

Chapter 6 discusses recent findings in biological and neurological development that may potentially impact the legal socialization process. Although biology is of central importance when talking about development of any kind, legal socialization scholars have largely ignored the role biology plays in the process. This represents a fundamental gap within the literature as it has becoming increasingly clear that how people interface with laws and legal authority are affected by their biological maturity. In particular, recent research has highlighted multiple neurological networks following different developmental trajectories that are fundamental to people’s capacity to regulate their social and legal behavior. Although this work has not been formally incorporated into the legal socialization context, it aligns nicely with the approaches outlined in chapters 4 and 5.</p