The Measurement of Legitimacy: A Rush to Judgment?
- 100 Downloads
In an important article on the methodological issues surrounding measuring of police legitimacy, Jackson and Bradford (Asian Journal of Criminology, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11417-019-09289-w, 2019) adequately warn against the use of confirmatory factor analysis as an adjudication tool for differentiating the possible sources and constituent components of police legitimacy. However, in the process of arguing against the Sun et al.’s (Asian Journal of Criminology, 13, 275–291, 2018) measure of legitimacy, they inadvertently bring attention to a more foundational issue—How should scientists conduct research and test theories in various cultures? Furthermore, their argument against the alternative measuring of police legitimacy elucidates an extensive problem facing criminology—they have brought attention paid to the interrogation of operationalizing key constructs within criminology. We argue that Jackson and Bradford’s (2019) critiques of Sun et al.’s (2018) modeling and subsequent testing of police legitimacy in China are a bit overstated. Additionally, we contend that testing theories, such as police legitimacy, across cultures should be conducted both top-down and bottom-up—neither are necessarily contradictory. We urge readers to be the ultimate amicus curiae because this issue is not a concretely right-or-wrong type issue.
KeywordsCross-national research Measurement Police legitimacy Theory testing Procedure justice
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Akers, R. L. (1997). Criminological theories: introduction and evaluation. Los Angeles: Roxbury.Google Scholar
- Bottoms, A., & Tankebe, J. (2012). Beyond procedural justice: a dialogic approach to legitimacy in criminal justice. The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 102, 119–170.Google Scholar
- Cao, L. (2004). Major criminological theories: concepts and measurement. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
- Cullen, F. T., Pratt, T., & Graham, A. (2019). Why longitudinal research is hurting criminology. The Criminologist, 44, 1–7.Google Scholar
- Ferrell, J., Hayward, K., Morrison, W., & Presdee, M. (Eds.). (2004). Cultural criminology unleashed. London: Glass House.Google Scholar
- Gibbs, J. P. (1985). The methodology of theory construction in criminology. In R. F. Meier (Ed.), Theoretical methods in criminology (pp. 23–50). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Graham, A. (2018). Measuring procedural justice: a case study in criminometrics. (Unpublished dissertation proposal). University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH.Google Scholar
- Huq, A. Z., Jackson, J., & Trinkner, R. (2017). Legitimating practices: revisiting the predicates of police legitimacy. British Journal of Criminology, 57, 1101–1122.Google Scholar
- Jackson, J., & Bradford, B. (2019). Blurring the distinction between empirical and normative legitimacy? A methodological commentary on ‘police legitimacy and citizen cooperation in China’. Asian Journal of Criminology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11417-019-09289-w.
- Lilly, J. R., Cullen, F. T., & Ball, R. A. (1995). Criminological theory: context and consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Manning, P. (2010). Democratic policing in a changing world. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.Google Scholar
- Merton, R. (1968). The bearing of empirical research on sociological theory. In M. Brodbeck (Ed.), Readings in the philosophy of the social sciences (pp. 481–496). London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Miller, D. (1994). Critical rationalism: a restatement and defense. Chicago, IL: Open Court.Google Scholar
- Pawson, R. (1989). A measure for measures: a manifesto for empirical sociology. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Popper, K. R. (1968).  The logic of scientific discovery. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
- Taylor, R. B. (1994). Research methods in criminal justice. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- Tittle, C. R. (1985). The assumption that general theories are not possible. In R. F. Meier (Ed.), Theoretical methods in criminology (pp. 93–121). Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
- Tyler, T. R. (1990). Why people obey the law. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
- Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. J. (2002). Trust in the law. New York, NY: Russell-Sage.Google Scholar
- Watkins, J. W. N. (1968). Methodological individualism and social tendencies. In M. Brodbeck (Ed.), Readings in the philosophy of the social sciences (pp. 269–280). New York: The Macmillan Company.Google Scholar
- Weber, M. (1968). Economy and society: an outline of interpretive sociology. New York: Bedminster Press.Google Scholar
- Young, J. (2011). The criminological imagination. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar