Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > No Procedural Justice, No Peace? Judgements of ...

Research

Associated organisational unit

Text available via DOI:

Keywords

View graph of relations

No Procedural Justice, No Peace? Judgements of Police Legitimacy in ‘Real-time’ Interactions Captured on Camera - Registered Report Stage 1

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Forthcoming

Standard

No Procedural Justice, No Peace? Judgements of Police Legitimacy in ‘Real-time’ Interactions Captured on Camera - Registered Report Stage 1. / Philpot, Richard; Levine, Mark; Acre-Plata, Carlos et al.
In: Royal Society Open Science, 21.07.2021.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Harvard

Philpot, R, Levine, M, Acre-Plata, C, Elphick, C, Zhang, M, Stuart, A, Walkington, Z, Pike, G, Frumkin, L, Popple, D, Keil, TF, Price, B, Nuseibeh, B & Bandara, A 2021, 'No Procedural Justice, No Peace? Judgements of Police Legitimacy in ‘Real-time’ Interactions Captured on Camera - Registered Report Stage 1', Royal Society Open Science. https://doi.org/https://osf.io/gmc4z

APA

Philpot, R., Levine, M., Acre-Plata, C., Elphick, C., Zhang, M., Stuart, A., Walkington, Z., Pike, G., Frumkin, L., Popple, D., Keil, T. F., Price, B., Nuseibeh, B., & Bandara, A. (in press). No Procedural Justice, No Peace? Judgements of Police Legitimacy in ‘Real-time’ Interactions Captured on Camera - Registered Report Stage 1. Royal Society Open Science. https://doi.org/https://osf.io/gmc4z

Vancouver

Philpot R, Levine M, Acre-Plata C, Elphick C, Zhang M, Stuart A et al. No Procedural Justice, No Peace? Judgements of Police Legitimacy in ‘Real-time’ Interactions Captured on Camera - Registered Report Stage 1. Royal Society Open Science. 2021 Jul 21. doi: https://osf.io/gmc4z

Author

Philpot, Richard ; Levine, Mark ; Acre-Plata, Carlos et al. / No Procedural Justice, No Peace? Judgements of Police Legitimacy in ‘Real-time’ Interactions Captured on Camera - Registered Report Stage 1. In: Royal Society Open Science. 2021.

Bibtex

@article{c5b892d5e25e40c4a218ddc9233264aa,
title = "No Procedural Justice, No Peace? Judgements of Police Legitimacy in {\textquoteleft}Real-time{\textquoteright} Interactions Captured on Camera - Registered Report Stage 1",
abstract = "{\textquoteleft}Procedural justice{\textquoteright} has long been advocated as key to maintaining citizen trust in policing. However, there is very little work analysing how both citizens and police officers judge the four key procedural justice predictors of police legitimacy (participation and voice; fairness and neutrality; dignity and respect; conveying trustworthy motives) in real-life policing events. In a preregistered design, and using a corpus of 44 videos of police-citizen interactions in the United Kingdom, we analyse the way 353 citizens and 353 police officers judge police legitimacy in the interactions. The analysis consists of four initial crossed-random effects mixed-model designs (each testing one procedural justice behavioural predictor on citizen perceptions) and two robustness crossed-random effects mixed-model analyses that explore the impact of other relevant factors on both citizen and police judgements of legitimacy. This combination of pre-registration and {\textquoteleft}real-life{\textquoteright} behavioural data provides the platform for a rigorous test of the procedural justice model.",
keywords = "Police citizen interaction, procedural justice, police legitimacy, lawfulness, video behavioural analysis, registered report",
author = "Richard Philpot and Mark Levine and Carlos Acre-Plata and Camilla Elphick and Min Zhang and Avelie Stuart and Zoe Walkington and Graham Pike and Lara Frumkin and Dan Popple and Keil, {Tina F.} and Blaine Price and Bashar Nuseibeh and Arosha Bandara",
year = "2021",
month = jul,
day = "21",
doi = "https://osf.io/gmc4z",
language = "English",
journal = "Royal Society Open Science",
issn = "2054-5703",
publisher = "The Royal Society",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - No Procedural Justice, No Peace? Judgements of Police Legitimacy in ‘Real-time’ Interactions Captured on Camera - Registered Report Stage 1

AU - Philpot, Richard

AU - Levine, Mark

AU - Acre-Plata, Carlos

AU - Elphick, Camilla

AU - Zhang, Min

AU - Stuart, Avelie

AU - Walkington, Zoe

AU - Pike, Graham

AU - Frumkin, Lara

AU - Popple, Dan

AU - Keil, Tina F.

AU - Price, Blaine

AU - Nuseibeh, Bashar

AU - Bandara, Arosha

PY - 2021/7/21

Y1 - 2021/7/21

N2 - ‘Procedural justice’ has long been advocated as key to maintaining citizen trust in policing. However, there is very little work analysing how both citizens and police officers judge the four key procedural justice predictors of police legitimacy (participation and voice; fairness and neutrality; dignity and respect; conveying trustworthy motives) in real-life policing events. In a preregistered design, and using a corpus of 44 videos of police-citizen interactions in the United Kingdom, we analyse the way 353 citizens and 353 police officers judge police legitimacy in the interactions. The analysis consists of four initial crossed-random effects mixed-model designs (each testing one procedural justice behavioural predictor on citizen perceptions) and two robustness crossed-random effects mixed-model analyses that explore the impact of other relevant factors on both citizen and police judgements of legitimacy. This combination of pre-registration and ‘real-life’ behavioural data provides the platform for a rigorous test of the procedural justice model.

AB - ‘Procedural justice’ has long been advocated as key to maintaining citizen trust in policing. However, there is very little work analysing how both citizens and police officers judge the four key procedural justice predictors of police legitimacy (participation and voice; fairness and neutrality; dignity and respect; conveying trustworthy motives) in real-life policing events. In a preregistered design, and using a corpus of 44 videos of police-citizen interactions in the United Kingdom, we analyse the way 353 citizens and 353 police officers judge police legitimacy in the interactions. The analysis consists of four initial crossed-random effects mixed-model designs (each testing one procedural justice behavioural predictor on citizen perceptions) and two robustness crossed-random effects mixed-model analyses that explore the impact of other relevant factors on both citizen and police judgements of legitimacy. This combination of pre-registration and ‘real-life’ behavioural data provides the platform for a rigorous test of the procedural justice model.

KW - Police citizen interaction

KW - procedural justice

KW - police legitimacy

KW - lawfulness

KW - video behavioural analysis

KW - registered report

U2 - https://osf.io/gmc4z

DO - https://osf.io/gmc4z

M3 - Journal article

JO - Royal Society Open Science

JF - Royal Society Open Science

SN - 2054-5703

ER -