Skip to main content

Carving Up Concepts? Differentiating Between Trust and Legitimacy in Public Attitudes Towards Legal Authority

  • Chapter

Abstract

In recent years, scholars of criminal justice and criminology have brought legitimacy to the forefront of academic and policy discussion. In the most influential definition, institutional trust is assumed to be an integral element of legitimacy, alongside duty to obey. For an individual to find a criminal justice institution to be legitimate, he or she must (a) believe that officials can be trusted to exercise their institutional power appropriately, and (b) feel a positive duty to obey rules and commands. In this chapter we argue that the nature, measurement, and motivating force of trust and legitimacy are in need of further explication. Considering these two concepts in a context of a type of authority that is both coercive and consent-based in nature, we make three claims: first, that legitimacy is the belief that an institution exhibits properties that justify its power and a duty to obey that is wrapped up in this sense of appropriateness; second, that trust is about positive expectations about valued behavior from institutional officials; and third, that legitimacy and institutional trust overlap conceptually if one assumes that people judge the appropriateness of the police as an institution on whether officers can be trusted to use their power appropriately. Our discussion will, we hope, be of broad theoretical and policy interest.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For the sake of brevity we do not discuss one or two additional subscales that are occasionally included in measures of legitimacy. For instance Tyler and Fagan (2008) added measures of identification with the police (e.g., Most of the police officers who work in your neighborhood would approve of how you live your life, and if you talked to most of the police officers who work in your neighborhood, you think you would find they have similar views to your own on many issues; see also Granot, Balcetis, Schneider, & Tyler, 2014). Piquero, Fagan, Mulvey, Steinberg, and Odgers (2005) included the following two measures: The police should be allowed to hold a person suspected of a serious crime until they get enough evidence to charge them, and the police should be allowed to stop people on the street and require them to identify themselves. Mazerolle, Antrobus, Bennett, and Tyler (2013) added measures of negative orientations towards the police to the scale of legitimacy, such as: I personally don’t think there is much the police can do to me to make me obey the law if I don’t want to.

  2. 2.

    There is some debate in the criminological literature as to whether these measures really do capture a sense of truly free consent (see Bottoms & Tankebe, 2012; Johnson et al., 2014; Tankebe, 2013; Tyler & Jackson, 2013). It is certainly important to define the concept clearly and phrase the survey questions appropriately. If one wanted to stress willing constraint one might try to avoid questions like Tankebe’s (2013): People like me have no choice but to obey the directives of the police and use instead questions like: I feel a moral obligation to obey the police (Bradford, Hohl, Jackson, & MacQueen, 2015).

  3. 3.

    Other researchers have used a reflective approach to measurement, treating the measures as “causal indicators” reflecting one or more underlying latent construct. A reflective approach to measurement means that dimensionality becomes a particularly important empirical issue. For instance, Johnson et al. (2014) fitted a series of confirmatory factor analysis models to indicators of duty to obey. They found that the associations between the various indicators of duty to obey could be explained by the mutual dependence of the item responses on not one but two underlying latent constructs. Because of the content coverage of the relevant items, they labelled two unobserved latent constructs as “obligation to obey” and “cynicism about the law.”

  4. 4.

    The exceptions have typically measured legitimacy using only institutional trust indicators. See for example Jonathan-Zamir & Weisburd, 2013; Murphy, Tyler, & Curtis, 2009; Tankebe, 2009.

  5. 5.

    The idea that legitimacy is partly about shared values can be traced back by Beetham (1991). For further discussion, see Bottoms and Tankebe (2012), Bradford, Jackson, and Hough (2014), Jackson et al. (2011), Tankebe (2013), Tyler and Jackson (2013), and some of the chapters in Tankebe and Liebling (2013).

  6. 6.

    The first studies to measure a sense of shared values between citizens and police (Jackson & Sunshine, 2007; Sunshine & Tyler, 2003b) addressed the idea that people look to the police to be prototypical representatives of a group’s moral values. According to Sunshine and Tyler (2003b) moral solidarity with legal authorities is “the belief that the values and tenets of law enforcement authorities are consistent with one’s personal beliefs about right and wrong, as well as with the group’s normative values” (p. 156). To explore the idea that people look to the police to defend, represent, and typify group morals and values, Jackson and Sunshine (2007) used similar measures, albeit ones that focused exclusively on identification with police values, e.g., I imagine that the values of most of the police officers who work in my neighborhood are very similar to my own.

References

  • Antrobus, E., Bradford, B., Murphy, K., & Sargeant, E. (2015). Community norms, procedural justice, and the public’s perceptions of police legitimacy. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 31, 151–170. doi:10.1177/1043986214568840.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baier, A. (1986). Trust and antitrust. Ethics, 96, 231–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barber, B. (1983). The logic and limits of trust. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, P. C. (2014). Conceptualizing and measuring trust and trustworthiness. Political Concepts: Committee on Concepts and Methods Working Paper Series, 61, 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beetham, D. (1991). The legitimation of power. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beetham, D. (2013). Revisiting legitimacy, twenty years on. In J. Tankebe & A. Liebling (Eds.), Legitimacy and criminal justice (pp. 19–36). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bittner, E. (1970). The functions of police in modern society. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, K. A., & Bauldry, S. (2011). Three Cs in measurement models: Causal indicators, composite indicators, and covariates. Psychological Methods, 16, 265.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bottoms, A., & Tankebe, J. (2012). Beyond procedural justice: A dialogic approach to legitimacy in criminal justice. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 102, 119–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradford, B., Hohl, K., Jackson, J., & MacQueen, S. (2015). Obeying the rules of the road: Procedural justice, social identity and normative compliance. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 31, 171–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradford, B., Huq, A., Jackson, J., & Roberts, B. (2014). What price fairness when security is at stake? Police legitimacy in South Africa. Regulation and Governance, 8, 246–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradford, B., Jackson, J., & Hough, M. (2014). Police legitimacy in action: Lessons for theory and practice. In M. Reisig & R. Kane (Eds.), The oxford handbook of police and policing (pp. 551–570). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradford, B., Jackson, J., & Stanko, E. (2009). Contact and confidence: Revisiting the impact of public encounters with the police. Policing and Society, 19, 20–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunson, R. K. (2007). ‘Police don’t like black people’: African‐American young men’s accumulated police experiences. Criminology & Public Policy, 6, 71–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunson, R. K., & Gau, J. M. (2014). Race, place, and policing the inner-city. In M. Reisig & R. J. Kane (Eds.), The oxford handbook of police and policing (pp. 362–382). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cao, L., Frank, J., & Cullen, F. T. (1996). Race, community context and confidence in the police. American Journal of Police, 15, 3–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 909–927.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Epp, C. R., Maynard-Moody, S., & Haider-Markel, D. P. (2014). Pulled over: How police stops define race and citizenship. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Flexon, J. L., Lurigio, A. J., & Greenleaf, R. G. (2009). Exploring the dimensions of trust in the police among Chicago juveniles. Journal of Criminal Justice, 37, 180–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gambetta, D. (1988). Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relations. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gau, J. M. (2011). The convergent and discriminant validity of procedural justice and police legitimacy: An empirical test of core theoretical propositions. Journal of Criminal Justice, 39, 489–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gau, J. M. (2014). Procedural justice and police legitimacy: A test of measurement and structure. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 39, 187–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gau, J. M., & Brunson, R. K. (2010). Procedural justice and order maintenance policing: A study of inner‐city young men’s perceptions of police legitimacy. Justice Quarterly, 27, 255–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geller, A., Fagan, J., Tyler, T. R., & Link, B. (2014). Aggressive policing and the mental health of young urban men. American Journal of Public Health, 104, 2321–2327.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Granot, Y., Balcetis, E., Schneider, K. E., & Tyler, T. R. (2014). Justice is not blind: Visual attention exaggerates effects of group identification on legal punishment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 2196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardin, R. (2002). Trust and trustworthiness. New York: Russell Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawdon, J. (2008). Legitimacy, trust, social capital, and policing styles: A theoretical statement. Police Quarterly, 11, 182–201. doi:10.1177/1098611107311852.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hohl, K., Bradford, B., & Stanko, E. A. (2010). Influencing trust and confidence in the Metropolitan Police: Results from an experiment testing the effect of leaflet drops on public opinion. British Journal of Criminology, 50, 491–513. doi:10.1093/bjc/azq005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hough, M., Jackson, J., & Bradford, B. (2013a). The governance of criminal justice, legitimacy and trust. In S. Body-Gendrot, R. Lévy, M. Hough, S. Snacken, & K. Kerezsi (Eds.), Routledge handbook of European criminology (pp. 243–265). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hough, M., Jackson, J., & Bradford, B. (2013b). Legitimacy, trust and compliance: an empirical test of procedural justice theory using the European Social Survey. In J. Tankebe & A. Liebling (Eds.), Legitimacy and criminal justice: An international exploration (pp. 326–352). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hough, M., Jackson, J., Bradford, B., Myhill, A., & Quinton, P. (2010). Procedural justice, trust and institutional legitimacy. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 4, 203–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huq, A. Z., Tyler, T. R., & Schulhofer, S. J. (2011a). How do the purposes and targets of policing influence the basis of public cooperation with law enforcement? Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 17, 419–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huq, A. Z., Tyler, T. R., & Schulhofer, S. J. (2011b). Mechanisms for eliciting cooperation in counterterrorism policing: A study of British Muslims. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 8, 728–761.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, J. (2015). On the dual motivational force of legitimate authority. In B. H. Bornstein & A. J. Tomkins (Eds.), Cooperation and compliance with authority: The role of institutional trust. 62nd Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, J., Asif, M., Bradford, B., & Zakar, M. Z. (2014). Corruption and police legitimacy in Lahore, Pakistan. British Journal of Criminology, 54, 1067–1088.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, J., Bradford, B., Hough, M., Kuha, J., Stares, S. R., Widdop, S., et al. (2011). Developing European indicators of trust in justice. European Journal of Criminology, 8, 267–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, J., Bradford, B., Hough, M., Myhill, A., Quinton, P., & Tyler, T. R. (2012). Why do people comply with the law? Legitimacy and the influence of legal institutions. British Journal of Criminology, 52, 1051–1071.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, J., Bradford, B., Stanko, E. A., & Hohl, K. (2012). Just authority? Trust in the police in England and Wales. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, J., Bradford, B., Kuha, J., & Hough, M. (2015). Empirical legitimacy as two connected psychological states. In G. Meško & J. Tankebe (Eds.), Improving legitimacy of criminal justice in emerging democracies (pp. 137–160). London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, J., Huq, A. Z., Bradford, B., & Tyler, T. R. (2013). Monopolizing force? Police legitimacy and public attitudes towards the acceptability of violence. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 19, 479–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, J., & Sunshine, J. (2007). Public confidence in policing: A Neo-Durkheimian perspective. British Journal of Criminology, 47, 214–233. doi:10.1093/bjc/azl031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D., Maguire, E. R., & Kuhns, J. B. (2014). Public perceptions of the legitimacy of the law and legal authorities: Evidence from the Caribbean. Law and Society Review, 48, 947–978.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonathan-Zamir, T., & Weisburd, D. (2013). The effects of security threats on antecedents of police legitimacy: Findings from a quasi-experiment in Israel. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 50, 3–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Justice, B., & Meares, T. L. (2014). How the criminal justice system educates citizens. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 651, 159–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelman, H. C., & Hamilton, V. L. (1989). Crimes of obedience. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kochel, T., Parks, R., & Mastrofski, S. (2013). Examining police effectiveness as a precursor to legitimacy and cooperation with police. Justice Quarterly, 30, 895–925.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E., & Tyler, T. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. The Academy of Management Review, 20, 709–734.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazerolle, L., Antrobus, E., Bennett, S., & Tyler, T. R. (2013). Shaping citizen perceptions of police legitimacy: A randomized field trial of procedural justice. Criminology, 51, 33–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McEvily, B. (2011). Reorganizing the boundaries of trust: From discrete alternatives to hybrid forms. Organization science, 22, 1266–1276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meares, T. L. (2014). The law and social science of stop & frisk. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 10, 335–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Möllering, G. (2001). The nature of trust: From Georg Simmel to a theory of expectation, interpretation and suspension. Sociology, 35, 403–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, K., Tyler, T. R., & Curtis, A. (2009). Nurturing regulatory compliance: Is procedural justice effective when people question the legitimacy of the law? Regulation and Governance, 3, 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papachristos, A. V., Meares, T. L., & Fagan, J. (2012). Why do criminals obey the law? The influence of legitimacy and social networks on active gun offenders. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 102, 397–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piquero, A. R., Fagan, J., Mulvey, E. P., Steinberg, L., & Odgers, C. (2005). Developmental trajectories of legal socialization among serious adolescent offenders. The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 96(1), 267–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (1964). Legal obligation and the duty of fair play. In S. Hook (Ed.), Law and philosophy. New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reisig, M. D., & Lloyd, C. (2009). Procedural justice, police legitimacy, and helping the police fight crime: Results from a survey of Jamaican adolescents. Police Quarterly, 12, 42–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reisig, M. D., & Parks, R. B. (2000). Experience, quality of life, and neighborhood context: A hierarchical analysis of satisfaction with police. Justice quarterly, 17, 607–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reisig, M. D., Bratton, J., & Gertz, M. G. (2007). The construct validity and refinement of process-based policing measures. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 1005–1027.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reith, C. (1952). The blind eye of history: A study of the origins of the present police era. London: Faber and Faber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, R. J., & Bartusch, D. J. (1998). Legal cynicism and (subcultural?) tolerance of deviance: The neighborhood context of racial differences. Law and Society Review, 32, 777–804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schilke, O., & Cook, K. S. (2013). A cross-level process theory of trust development in interorganizational relationships. Strategic Organization, 11, 281–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulhofer, S., Tyler, T., & Huq, A. (2011). American policing at a crossroads: Unsustainable policies and the procedural justice alternative. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 101, 335–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skogan, W. G. (2006). Police and community in Chicago: A tale of three cities. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoutland, S. (2001). The multiple dimensions of trust in resident/police relations in Boston. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 38, 226–256. doi:10.1177/0022427801038003002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sunshine, J., & Tyler, T. R. (2003a). The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in public support for policing. Law and Society Review, 37, 513–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sunshine, J., & Tyler, T. (2003b). Moral solidarity, identification with the community, and the importance of procedural justice: The police as prototypical representatives of a group’s moral values. Social Psychology Quarterly, 66, 153–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tankebe, J. (2009). Self-help, policing, and procedural justice: Ghanian vigilantism and the rule of law. Law and Society Review, 43, 245–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tankebe, J. (2013). Viewing things differently: The dimensions of public perceptions of legitimacy. Criminology, 51, 103–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tankebe, J., & Liebling, A. (2013). Legitimacy and criminal justice: An international exploration. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (1988). What is procedural justice?: Criteria used by citizens to assess the fairness of legal procedures. Law and Society Review, 22, 103–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (1989). The psychology of procedural justice: A test of the group-value model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 830–838.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (1994). Psychological models of the justice motive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 850–863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (1997). The psychology of legitimacy. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 323–344.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (2003). Procedural justice, legitimacy, and the effective rule of law. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research (Vol. 30, pp. 431–505). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (2004). Enhancing police legitimacy. The Annals of the American Academy, 593, 84–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (2006a). Why people obey the law. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (2006b). Psychological perspectives on legitimacy and legitimation. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 375–400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (2009). Legitimacy and criminal justice: The benefits of self-regulation. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 7, 307–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (2011a). Trust and legitimacy: Policing in the USA and Europe. European Journal of Criminology, 8, 254–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (2011b). Why people cooperate. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Fagan, J. (2008). Why do people cooperate with the police? Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 6, 231–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. J. (2002). Trust in the law: Encouraging public cooperation with the police and courts. New York: Russell-Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Jackson, J. (2013). Future challenges in the study of legitimacy and criminal justice. In J. Tankebe & A. Liebling (Eds.), Legitimacy and criminal justice: An international exploration (pp. 83–104). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Jackson, J. (2014). Popular legitimacy and the exercise of legal authority: Motivating compliance, cooperation and engagement. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 20, 78–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., Jackson, J., & Mentovich, A. (forthcoming, 2015). On the consequences of being a target of suspicion: Potential pitfalls of proactive police contact. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., Fagan, J. A., & Geller, A. (2014). Street stops and police legitimacy: Teachable moments in young urban men’s legal socialization. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 11, 751–785.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., Schulhofer, S. J., & Huq, A. Z. (2010). Legitimacy and deterrence effects in counter-terrorism policing: A study of Muslim Americans. Law and Society Review, 44, 365–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe, S. E., Nix, J., Kaminski, R., & Rojek, J. (2015). Is the effect of procedural justice on police legitimacy invariant? Testing the generality of procedural justice and competing antecedents of legitimacy. Journal of Quantiative Criminology, doi:10.1007/s10940-015-9263-8.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Jonathan Jackson would like to thank Yale School Law and Harvard Kennedy School for hosting him while he coauthored this chapter; he is also grateful to the United Kingdom’s Economic and Social Research Council for funding the research leave (grant number ES/L011611/1).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonathan Jackson .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Jackson, J., Gau, J.M. (2016). Carving Up Concepts? Differentiating Between Trust and Legitimacy in Public Attitudes Towards Legal Authority. In: Shockley, E., Neal, T., PytlikZillig, L., Bornstein, B. (eds) Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Trust. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22261-5_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics