Response to Criticism: Police Legitimacy, Beyond the Entrenched Niches of Expertise
- 49 Downloads
The purpose of this article is to first re-state the key points of the rejoinder by Cao and Graham. It then proceeds to defend and clarify the arguments that we have made in our article by raising a few misinterpretations by the two reviewers. I end this article with an advice from John Braithwaite 30 years ago that we should nurture the new endeavors in criminology instead of being united against such undertakings.
KeywordsMeasurement Police legitimacy Procedural justice Theory testing
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 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., & Graham, A. (2019). The measurement of legitimacy: a rush to judgment? Asian Journal of Criminology. Accepted on August 18, 2019.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. (In Press).Google Scholar
- Manning, P. (2010). Democratic policing in a changing world. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.Google Scholar