Legitimacy judgments in neighborhood context: Antecedents in “good” vs “bad” neighborhoods

Policing differs across neighborhoods, but little is known about how context conditions residents’ assessments about police legitimacy. The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether procedural justice and police effectiveness differently contribute to legitimacy judgments depending on the security risk inherent in the context.

The research applies a series of multi-level regression models using nearly 3,000 surveys of Trinidad and Tobago residents.

Police legitimacy and the conditions that promote legitimacy vary across neighborhoods. In “good” neighborhoods, individuals draw on police effectiveness and procedural justice to infer legitimacy, but in at-risk neighborhoods, residents’ views derive from effectiveness. Procedural justice does not play a significant role.

One implication for police is that the current emphasis on evidence-based policing strategies, especially in high crime neighborhoods, can provide a mechanism to improve the generally negative views about police legitimacy held by those residents. The findings do not imply, however, that police need not be concerned about procedural justice in at-risk neighborhoods. In fact, as police improve their crime prevention prowess, views about how procedurally just their methods are increase in importance.

Prior research addressing the antecedents of legitimacy has focused on individual demographic and attitudinal predictors. Only two prior studies have begun to investigate whether residents of different contexts may form their views based on different antecedents. This study outlines a theoretical basis for why different bases may be expected and then tests those expectations using rigorous statistical analyses.