Police legitimacy in Africa: a multilevel multinational

Download PDF
1 downloads 0 Views 1MB Size Report
Comment
Jan 20, 2017 - cedures and constitutes a betrayal of trust placed in officials to act fairly and impartially. Thus, ... the passage of several laws, including the Homeland Security Act and the Patriot Act that strength- ..... Disclosure statement.
Policing and Society An International Journal of Research and Policy

ISSN: 1043-9463 (Print) 1477-2728 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gpas20

Police legitimacy in Africa: a multilevel multinational analysis Francis D. Boateng To cite this article: Francis D. Boateng (2017): Police legitimacy in Africa: a multilevel multinational analysis, Policing and Society, DOI: 10.1080/10439463.2017.1280034 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2017.1280034

Published online: 20 Jan 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=gpas20 Download by: [68.122.14.157]

Date: 20 January 2017, At: 11:55

POLICING AND SOCIETY, 2017 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2017.1280034

Police legitimacy in Africa: a multilevel multinational analysis Francis D. Boateng Department of Legal Studies, The University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS, USA ABSTRACT

ARTICLE HISTORY

Using data obtained from multiple sources, with more than 40,000 individuals nested in 29 countries, a multilevel analysis was conducted to predict the effects of country-level variables on police legitimacy. Results from the unconditional analysis suggest that a significant variation in police legitimacy was at country level. Of the individual predictors included, being employed, being satisfied with democracy, and being an urban dweller showed positive relations with legitimacy. Police illegitimacy was high among the old, people with prior victimisation experience, and those who were fearful of crime. Among the country-level predictors, countries’ level of democracy and peacefulness had significant relationship with legitimacy, whereas institutional corruption, impact of terrorism and rate of victimisation did not. Policy implications of the findings are discussed.

Received 8 September 2016 Accepted 3 January 2017 KEYWORDS

Police legitimacy; terrorism; Africa; democracy

Introduction In recent times, the concept of legitimacy has gained popularity in police practice and research. This popularity is largely due to the importance of the concept in gaining public support for police work (Tyler 1997, Sunshine and Tyler 2003, Jackson et al. 2012). The importance of police legitimacy cannot be disputed, and many scholars have contended that a legitimate police institution promotes cooperative attitudes among citizens, such as accepting police decisions, complying with the laws, reporting crimes, and providing information, as well as forming a collaborative relationship with the police (Tyler 1990, 2005, Stoutland 2001, Sunshine and Tyler 2003, Hough and Roberts 2004, Rosenbaum et al. 2005, Jackson and Bradford 2010, Murphy and Cherney 2012, Mazerolle et al. 2013). A legitimate police force faces minimal to no challenge to its authority, and subsequently enjoys citizens’ voluntary cooperation (Reisig et al. 2012, Tankebe 2013). However, a police force suffering from a lack of legitimacy faces difficulties in securing public cooperation and compliance, and ultimately becomes less effective and more violent (Memmo et al. 2003, Goldsmith 2005, Jackson et al. 2012). Given the importance of legitimacy in policing, the antecedents of legitimacy have also received attention in the literature. Previous research has demonstrated that trust and confidence in the police are important determining factors in the evaluation of police legitimacy, alongside procedural justice. A growing body of literature supports the assertions that public trust influences police effectiveness and legitimacy, and that trust legitimises police actions (Hough et al. 2010, Hough 2012). Although few would deny the significance of legitimacy – and its antecedents – in policing, several factors that likely influence it, such as level of democracy, institutional corruption, and victimisation, have not been well studied comparatively. Additionally, it is not clear how the impact of terrorism and a country’s level of peacefulness influence citizens’ evaluation of police legitimacy from a cross-cultural perspective. These unexplored issues have left a gap in the understanding of police legitimacy CONTACT Francis D. Boateng

[email protected]

© 2017 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group

2

F. D. BOATENG

and its antecedent, trust in the police. As noted by Morris (2015), it is vital to evaluate trust and confidence in the police in different societies and to understand how societal characteristics affect these antecedents of legitimacy. To address the above issues and fill this gap in the literature, the current study uses data from multiple sources, with more than 40,000 individuals in 29 African countries, to predict the effects of country-level variables on police legitimacy in Africa. Specifically, the paper examines the questions: Do level of democracy, institutional corruption, and victimisation cause variation in citizens’ evaluations of police legitimacy. Moreover, do terrorism and rate of peacefulness in a country affect police legitimacy? Answers to these questions will strengthen our knowledge and understanding of the determinants of police legitimacy. The paper begins by reviewing the literature on police legitimacy and its antecedents, including its role in creating positive police-citizen relationships. I will then review the literature on country-level and individual factors and their relationships with police legitimacy. This section will be followed by discussions of the methods and measurements, results, and conclusion.

Police legitimacy: its importance and antecedents Police legitimacy is a multifaceted concept that has no single dimensional definition. Many police scholars have defined legitimacy as the process of legitimation in which practices and behaviour of the police are paramount (Marenin 1990, Reiner 2010, Lee et al. 2015). Sunshine and Tyler (2003) conceptualised legitimacy as ‘a property of an authority that leads people to feel that that institution is entitled to be deferred to and obeyed’ (p. 514). Based on this definition, individuals defer to and obey police commands because they respect and accept the police institution as an authority to make decisions. In modern democratic societies, the police are expected to use coercive force as a last resort to achieve compliance with the laws being enforced; citizens are expected to comply voluntarily with police directives because the police are generally seen as legitimate (Tyler 2006, Boateng and Darko 2016). Police institutions are considered legitimate when people view them as possessing the moral authority to issue commands, keep the peace, and enforce the law (Gau et al. 2012). Marenin (1990) noted that police legitimacy evolves, and that police behaviour, practices, policies, and interactions with the public affect the level of legitimacy the public grant to the police. Legitimacy has been well researched in policing (Marenin 1990, Tyler 1990, 2005, Stoutland 2001, Sunshine and Tyler 2003, Rosenbaum et al. 2005, Frazier 2007, Horowitz 2007, Hawdon 2008, Murphy 2009, Goodman-Delahunty 2010, Reiner 2010, Murphy and Cherney 2012, Mazerolle et al. 2013, Wexler 2014, Lee et al. 2015). There is a growing consensus among these numerous studies that legitimacy promotes positive behavioural outcomes that lead to effective policing, underscoring the importance of legitimacy in policing. It has been widely established that without citizens’ approval and consent, it is hard for police to carry out their mandates (Frazier 2007). Police legitimacy depends on numerous factors, including effectiveness and efficiency of the police, respect of citizens, satisfaction with police performance, level of accountability, and how the police adhere to procedural rules when interacting with citizens (Tyler 1990, Goldsmith 2005, Flexon et al. 2009, Mazerolle et al. 2013). The public will defer to the authority and directives of the police when they perceive the police to be effective in using procedural means to accomplish their goals. A series of empirical studies conducted to assess the importance of legitimacy support the above claims. For instance, Tyler and Huo (2002), analysing data on more than 1600 residents of Los Angeles and Oakland, found that perceptions of police legitimacy were associated with people’s willingness to accept police decisions. In that same year, the authors conducted a similar study on residents of Chicago and observed that Chicagoans who viewed the police as legitimate were more likely to report that they followed the law (see also Weber 1968, Tyler 1990, Sunshine and Tyler 2003). These results suggest that citizens will not automatically defer to the police and comply with the laws of the land just because the police have the legal mandate to modify their behaviours; instead, they will only do so when they consider the police to be legitimate authority figures.

POLICING AND SOCIETY

3

In addition to the extensive studies conducted to assess the importance of police legitimacy, studies have also placed much emphasis on the antecedents of legitimacy in policing. Prior studies have identified four core elements as determinants of police legitimacy: procedural justice, police performance, public trust, and confidence. Each of these elements plays a significant role in determining a department’s level of public acceptance. Procedural justice, which refers to the fairness and appropriateness of the procedures used by the police to exercise their authority (Tyler 2004), has been widely studied. Findings suggest that people will view the police as legitimate if they believe that the police employ fair and objective procedures and treat people with respect and dignity (Mazerolle et al. 2013, Bradford et al. 2014). Moreover, when individuals view the police as effective in controlling crime, they are more likely to consider the police legitimate (Jonathan-Zamir and Weisburd 2011) and subsequently defer to their authority. Trust and confidence have also been seen as important factors in maintaining legitimacy (Lee et al. 2015). According to Lee et al. (2015), a police force that is not considered trustworthy is unlikely to gain legitimacy in the eyes of the public. When citizens trust the police, they are more likely to obey the laws and accept their commands. Jackson and Bradford (2010) noted that trust and confidence in the police could enhance citizens’ participation in police community programmes and further lead to voluntary cooperation with the police. Overall, there are multiple factors influencing police legitimacy in different cultural settings, and each of these factors is equally important. Some studies have ranked procedural justice and assessment of police performance as more important than other factors (Sunshine and Tyler, 2003, Tankebe, 2013). Irrespective of the level of importance, there is the need, as Marenin (1983) noted, to disaggregate the effects of different factors by group and identity differences. The sections that follow critically review the extant literature on specific country-level and individual factors predicting police legitimacy.

Country-level variables and police legitimacy Democracy, institutional corruption, and rate of victimisation In assessing the factors that shape citizens’ views of police legitimacy, it is important to consider the impact of the level of democracy prevailing in a given country. This is because of the significant role the police play in sustaining and promoting democratic values in a country (Goldstein 1977, Beare and Murray 2007). For the ordinary individual, the police are the most visible representatives of government; their actions strongly dictate whether government is perceived to be legitimate (Hsieh and Boateng 2015). In general, democracy demands that people should be empowered to govern themselves through participation in making the decisions that affect them. The making of institutional decisions must therefore reflect the voices of the people. However, in some societies, people are governed without their voices being heard. The deliberate failure to protect the democratic rights of individuals has severe and devastating consequences on attitudes towards the police (Perez 2003, Karstedt and LaFree 2006, Hsieh and Boateng 2015). The relationship between level of democracy and antecedents of legitimacy cannot be underestimated. Prior studies have found a positive effect of level of democracy on institutional trust and confidence (Cao and Zhao 2005, Chu et al. 2008, Jang et al. 2010, Cao et al. 2012, Hsieh and Boateng 2015). People living in countries with higher levels of democracy tend to report higher trust and confidence in the police. In a comparative study evaluating the effects of country-level predictors on public confidence in the police, Jang et al. (2010) found that level of democracy positively predicted confidence in the police. Similarly, Cao and Zhao (2005) noted that level of confidence in the police is higher in democratic countries than in authoritarian nations like those in Latin America. The positive relationship between legitimacy and democracy suggests that citizens in democratic countries who are satisfied with their country’s level of democracy and who believe their voices are being heard, they are treated fairly, and their rights are respected are more likely to consider the police legitimate than those in authoritarian countries where force is used to obtain obedience. It must be noted,

4

F. D. BOATENG

however, that not all scholars agree with the above description (Norris 1999, 2011, Morris 2015). Norris (1999) introduced the concept of ‘critical citizens’ and argued that these individuals have lower support for political institutions due to their overly critical and high expectations for democracy. Morris (2015) did not observe any relationship between democracy and public confidence, suggesting that level of democracy does not influence confidence in the police. In addition to the influence of democracy, institutional corruption has also been found to shape citizens’ attitudes towards the police. According to You (2006), corruption is a violation of just procedures and constitutes a betrayal of trust placed in officials to act fairly and impartially. Thus, police legitimacy is likely to diminish when there are widespread corrupt practices among officials. Previous studies have established a negative relationship between corruption and police legitimacy, arguing that corruption reduces individuals’ trust and confidence in the police (Kaariainen 2007, Silva Forné 2009, Sabet 2012, Hsieh and Boateng 2015). For example, Silva Forné (2009) found that bribery solicitation negatively affected respondents’ satisfaction with the police. Similarly, Sabet (2012), examining the factors that contributed to citizens’ dissatisfaction with the Mexico police, observed that corruption among police officers was a major contributor to citizens’ dissatisfaction. More specifically, the author found that direct experience with bribery was a major source of citizens’ dissatisfaction with the police. Individuals who had directly experienced police corruption in the form of bribe extortion expressed higher dissatisfaction with the police. Two comparative studies conducted in Europe and Asia made similar observations. In Kaarianinen’s (2007) comparative study of European countries, the author found that corruption in government explained country-level variation in trust in the police. Furthermore, Hsieh and Boateng (2015) observed that higher government integrity increased public trust in both the Taiwanese and Chinese police forces. Previous studies have also turned to rates of victimisation to explain variations in public acceptance of the police (Ren et al. 2005, Jang et al. 2010). A common thread in their observations is that victimisation reduces trust and confidence in the police. For example, Jang et al. (2010) found that citizens living in a country with a higher homicide rate reported lower confidence in the police than those in lower-homicide countries. Ren et al. (2005) found that respondents who reported being victimised within the 12 months prior to their study reported lower confidence in the police. This negative effect of victimisation may occur because the failure of the police to protect citizens leads them to view the police as incapable of protecting them against crime. The above review of the literature illustrates the potency of democracy, corruption, and victimisation in explaining the variation in police legitimacy across countries. However, most of the studies reviewed were conducted in countries outside Africa, limiting a holistic argument about the validity of these country-level indicators. The current study addresses this limitation by testing the following hypotheses: H1: Citizens living in countries with higher levels of democracy will report higher levels of police legitimacy. H2: As institutional corruption increases, police legitimacy will decrease. H3: Citizens living in countries with higher rates of victimisation will report lower levels of police legitimacy.

Terrorism and rate of peacefulness Although the effect of terrorism on police legitimacy has been examined, there is still room for further examination, since there are disagreements on how exactly terrorist activities shape citizens’ evaluations of the police. Evidence in the literature suggests two opposing theoretical models for explaining the relationship between terrorism and police legitimacy. The first model argues that terrorist threat increases police legitimacy (Parker 1995, Jonathan 2010). Jonathan (2010) observed that public attitudes towards the Israeli police improved during times of severe terrorist threat. The explanation of this effect is derived from the cohesion thesis, which assumes that an external threat enhances social cohesion and efficacy (Simmel 1955, Coser 1956). In the United States for instance,

POLICING AND SOCIETY

5

after the tragic terrorist event that caused the lives of about 3000 people (while several thousand individuals were injured) in 9 September 2001, Americans came together and worked towards a common course (Chanley 2002, Landua et al. 2004, Panagopoulos, 2006, Morgan, 2009, Rockmore, 2011). The cohesion that existed among Americans immediately after the 9/11 events resulted in the passage of several laws, including the Homeland Security Act and the Patriot Act that strengthened and extended the powers of law enforcement agencies to detect and identify cues of terrorism in advance (Whitehead and Aden 2002, Howell 2004, Huddy and Feldman 2011). Likewise, one can explain why terrorism leads to increased legitimacy from the rally effect perspective (Mueller 1973, Sigelman and Conover 1981). This perspective presupposes that during a period of security threat, people rally behind governmental institutions like the police, increasing their support for these institutions. However, after the threat has been eliminated, citizens’ support declines to normal. This suggests that in the wake of a terrorist attack, police legitimacy may be high, but once the threat has passed, it diminishes. The opposing model of the relationship between terrorism and legitimacy states that terrorism reduces police legitimacy. Active involvement of the police in counterterrorism has been offered as an explanation for why citizens’ evaluations of police legitimacy are low (Fishman 2005, Bayley and Weisburd 2009, Hasisi et al. 2009, Weisburd et al. 2009, Jonathan, 2010). According to these experts, police engagement in the fight against terrorism results in the use of high-policing tactics – extensive surveillance and monitoring – that are mostly less transparent and accountable. These aggressive tactics and strategies may undermine fundamental human rights and liberties and ultimately lead to negative public ratings. Moreover, some scholars believe that involvement in counterterrorism activities may shift police attention away from civil duties such as controlling crime, disorder, and disturbances, and that would make the police unpopular among the people (see Weisburd et al. 2010). To increase our understanding of the relationship between terrorism and public attitudes, police scholars have explored the circumstances that make citizens cooperate with the police to fight terrorism (Tyler et al. 2010, Jonathan-Zamir et al. 2016). Tyler et al. (2010) tested the potential influence of two opposing models – instrumental and normative – in soliciting support for police using a sample of Muslim Americans, and found that the normative perspective is more influential in ensuring cooperative relationship between members of the Muslim community than the instrumental perspective. What this means is that, American Muslims consider to a greater extent how fair the police treat them before deciding to cooperate or not. Similarly, in a recent study that analysed a sample of more than 1900 passengers patronising that Ben-Gurion Airport, Israel, Jonathan-Zamir et al. (2016) argued that procedural justice practices of the police undeniably lead to citizens cooperating with the police in fighting crime, including terrorism. Another area of attitudinal research that has not been well explored is the relationship between a country’s rate of peacefulness and citizens’ assessment of police legitimacy. Peace generally denotes a lack of violence or the fear of violence (Global Peace Index 2015). A country is considered peaceful when there is no war or other violent activity that causes undue fear in the people. People are happy and worry little about crime, which may eventually shape their attitudes towards the police. Although it has not been fully examined, some scholars believe that there is a positive relationship between happiness and confidence in the police (Cao et al. 1998, Cao and Stack 2005, Cao and Dai 2006). There is a direct negative relationship between peace and corruption: institutional corruption reduces a country’s level of peacefulness (Global Peace Index 2015). Although this relationship is not of interest in the current study, an understanding of it will help to draw a connection between peacefulness and police legitimacy. If the argument that perceived institutional corruption undermines peace is true, then we can logically deduce that when the police are largely viewed as a corrupt institution, citizens may blame the police for the decline of the peace they enjoy and subsequently rate the police badly.

6

F. D. BOATENG

Given the limitations in the literature and the small number of studies that have used terrorism and rates of peacefulness to explain variations in police legitimacy across countries, the current study tests the following hypotheses: H4: Citizens living in a country that is severely impacted by terrorist activities will report low police legitimacy. H5: As rate of peacefulness increases, police legitimacy increases.

Individual-level factors and police legitimacy In addition to country-level factors, the effects of several individual-level variables on police legitimacy and its antecedents have been examined. Age, gender, race, marital status, socioeconomic status, and education have been the major indicators. Most of the research shows a positive relationship between age and favourable attitudes towards police (Jesilow et al. 1995, Huang and Vaughn 1996, Reisig and Parks 2000, Powell et al. 2008, Hsieh and Boateng 2015). Younger individuals routinely hold more unfavourable attitudes towards the police than older people. The effect of gender is mixed. Some studies have found that males hold more positive views than females (Brown and Coulter 1983, Hsieh and Boateng 2015). Other studies have found that females hold more positive views than males (Morris, 2015, Boateng et al. 2016). Still another study has found that gender had no effect (Hurst and Frank 2000). We are not sure why the effects of gender are so erratic across different studies. Furthermore, studies have found that individuals of lower socioeconomic status tend to have less favourable attitudes towards the police than those of higher socioeconomic status (Cao et al. 1996, Huang and Vaughn 1996, Wu et al. 2009). For instance, Wu et al. (2009) observed that lower-class individuals were most likely to express lack of satisfaction with the police. However, some studies have found contrarily that wealthy and highly educated individuals perceive the police less favourably than lower-income and less educated persons (Murphy and Worrall 1999, Weitzer and Tuch 1999, Sunshine and Tyler, 2003). Sunshine and Tyler (2003) argued that highly educated people were likely to indicate lower levels of police legitimacy. In a recent comparative study that utilised both United States and South Korean samples, Boateng et al. (2016) found that the less educated in both countries had higher confidence in their respective police institutions than highly educated individuals. Specifically, the authors observed that Americans with a high school education were more likely to have higher confidence in the police compared to those with more than a high school education. Likewise, South Koreans who possessed less than a high school education tended to have higher confidence in the police than those with high school education or higher. Marital status and employment have been found to show a positive relationship to favourable attitudes towards police. For instance, Cao and Zhao (2005) observed that people who were married and employed reported higher levels of confidence in the police than single and unemployed individuals did. The effect of fear of crime has also been observed (Weitzer and Tuch 2005, Reynolds et al. 2008, Boateng 2016). The conclusion made by these scholars is that fear of crime generally reduces confidence in the police. However, other researchers have found that an increase in fear of crime leads to an increase in confidence (Zhao et al. 2002). Previous research has also found that location matters in explaining citizens’ evaluations of police legitimacy. For instance, studies have found that people living in the suburbs have better attitudes towards the police than people living in urban areas (Thomas and Hyman 1977, Hurst and Frank 2000). The current study explores some of these effects in the context of African societies.

Methods Individual-level data The individual-level data in this study were obtained from the fifth round of the Afrobarometer Survey, conducted in 35 countries between 2011 and 2013. The survey, which began in 1999,

POLICING AND SOCIETY

7

measures people’s attitudes towards democracy, governance, economic conditions, and related issues in Africa. Data from each country were obtained by a representative multistage random sampling of individuals 18 years or older. Although the current study initially included 45,589 individuals from 29 of the 35 African countries, 32,060 were retained for the HLM nonlinear statistical analyses after removing missing data using the listwise deletion approach. The present study requires all the countries to have data for individual- and country-level variables; thus, the final sample of the analysis included 29 African countries.1 Although these countries were not randomly selected, they are representative of the various divisions of Africa.

Variable description Dependent variable. Police legitimacy was initially measured as an ordinal variable by asking respondents how much trust they had in the police organisations in their respective countries and providing them with four response options: 1 = not at all, 2 = just a little, 3 = somewhat, and 4 = a lot. For the purpose of statistical analysis, this ordinal variable was transformed into a dichotomous variable so as to reduce the potential for translation problems across the nations (Cao and Hou 2001, Morris 2015). Therefore, the variable was recoded into a binary variable, with 1 = somewhat or a lot of trust and 0 = not at all or just a little trust. Demographic variables. Four demographic characteristics were included in this study. Gender was measured as 0 = female and 1 = male; age was measured in actual years at the time of survey administration. Employment status was assessed as 0 = unemployed or 1 = employed. Location was also measured as a dichotomous variable, with 0 = rural and 1 = urban. Satisfaction with democracy. A single item was used to gauge respondents’ satisfaction with their country’s democracy: ‘Overall, how satisfied are you with the way democracy works in your country?’ The response categories were modified from the original survey to form a dichotomous measure with 0 = not satisfied and 1 = satisfied. Victimisation. Two items with the same lead-in question were used to measure respondents’ experiences with crime. The lead-in question read, ‘Over the past year, have you or anyone in your family: (1) had something stolen from the house? And (2) been physically attacked?’ The response categories were 0 = no; 1 = yes, once; 2 = yes, twice; and 3 = yes, three or more times. Responses to these items were combined to form the victimisation composite scale. Fear of crime. Likewise, two items with the same lead-in question were used to measure respondents’ level of fear of crime. The lead-in question read, ‘Over the past year, how often, if ever, have you or anyone in your family: (1) felt unsafe walking in your neighbourhood? (2) feared crime in your own home?’ The response categories were 1 = just once or twice; 2 = several times; 3 = many times; and 4 = always. Responses to these items were combined to form the fear of crime composite scale.

Macro-level data There are five country-level variables in this study, and these were obtained from a variety of public data sources. In order to gauge the impact of terrorism on the countries being studied, I used the 2015 Global Terrorism Index, produced by the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP).2 The countries are scored between 0 and 10, with 0 indicating no impact of terrorism and 10 the highest impact of terrorism. Similarly, the 2015 Global Peace Index produced by IEP was used to measure the level of peace in the countries: a higher GPI score indicates less peace and a lower score more peace. To assess perceived institutional corruption in a given country, the current study used Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index (CPI), which ranks a country based on its level of corruption from 0 (highly corrupt) to 100 (very clean). Lastly, the measures for level of democracy and victimisation were aggregated from the Afrobarometer round five survey. The aggregation was done by averaging the individual responses to each of the two variables so that the variables become countrylevel units of analysis.

8

F. D. BOATENG

Plan of analysis The overall aim of this study is to examine the influence of country-level variables – level of democracy, rate of peacefulness, institutional corruption, impact of terrorism, and victimisation – as well as individual-level variables on police legitimacy. Given that the data analysed were clustered, with individuals nested within countries, a multilevel analysis technique was employed. This technique, according to Raudenbush and Bryk (2002), enables a researcher to simultaneously model and estimate both individual- and country-level relationships. Specifically, considering that the primary dependent variable is a binary nonlinear variable, a hierarchical nonlinear binary logit regression method that uses the Bernoulli distribution and a logit link function was used. This method is embedded in HLM7 (Raudenbush and Bryk 2002). The analysis involves fitting three binary logit regression models instantaneously for the dependent variable: an unconditional model (Model 1), a within-country model (Model 2), and a between-country model (Model 3). The unconditional model is an intercept-only model and contains no predictors. The within-country model estimates the relationship between the individual predictors and police legitimacy for individual i in the country j. Finally, the between-country model assesses the influence of country-level variables on police legitimacy. In specifying the models, the individual-level variables were group-meancentred, whereas the country-level variables were grand-mean-centred. Multicollinearity is not a problem for the level 1 and 2 independent variables (see Tables 2 and 3).

Results The descriptive statistics for the study variables are shown in Table 1. Based on these statistics, it is logical to argue that the 29 African countries studied have a moderate level of police legitimacy. Thirty-five percent (M = .35, SD = .48) of the respondents reported perceiving the police as legitimate. At the individual country level, the 29 countries could be grouped into four major levels of police legitimacy: very-high-legitimacy countries (scores ranging from 80% to 100%), high-legitimacy countries (60–79%), moderate-legitimacy countries (35–59%), and low-legitimacy countries (34% or lower). This categorisation is based on the scores reported by the respondents (see Appendix). While no African country was placed in the very-high-legitimacy category, 12 countries possessed high legitimacy: Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Table 1. Descriptive statistics for study variables. Variable name Dependent variable Legitimacy Independent variables Individual-level variables Male Age Employed Location Satisfaction with democracy Fear of crime Victimisation Country-level variables Institutional corruption – CPI Peacefulness – GPI Impact of terrorism – GTI Rate of victimisation Level of democracy Not a democracy Democracy w/major problems Democracy w/minor problems Full democracy

N

M

SD

Min

Max

34,683

0.35

0.48

0.00

1.00

45,589 45,166 45,397 45,589 42,561 45,374 45,495

0.50 36.98 0.32 0.37 0.19 1.53 0.35

0.50 14.52 0.47 0.48 0.39 2.19 0.59

0.00 18.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

1.00 105.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 8.00 2.00

29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29

34.93 2.10 2.45 0.17 2.07 0.11 0.30 0.37 0.21

10.92 0.41 2.65 0.38 0.65 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.10

15.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.01 0.16 0.20 0.07

63.00 4.00 9.00 1.00 3.00 0.39 0.50 0.55 0.40

POLICING AND SOCIETY

9

Table 2. Correlation between police legitimacy and the individual-level variables (N = 41,199). Police legitimacy Police legitimacy 1 Male .01 Age .05** Employed −.10** Location – urban −.11** Fear of crime −.04** Victimisation −.04** Satisfaction with .20** democracy *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

Male

Age

Employed

Location – urban

Fear of crime

Victimisation

Satisfaction with democracy

1 .11** .12** .00 −.03** .02** .01

1 −.00 −.07** −.00 −.04** .06**

1 .11** −.02** .01** −.03**

1 .07** .05** −.06**

1 .30** −.07**

1 −.06**

1

Table 3. Correlation between police legitimacy and the country-level variables (N = 29). Y: Police legitimacy X1: Institutional corruption – CPI X2: Peacefulness – GPI X3: Impact of terrorism – GTI X4: Average victimisation X5: Not democracy X6: Democracy w/major problem X7: Democracy w/minor problem X8: Full democracy

Y 1 −.07** .07** −.13** −.02 −.07** −.07** .015 .14**

X1

X2

X3

X4

X5

X6

X7

X8

1 −.35** −.54** −.05** −.53** −.52** .61** .51**

1 .53** .30** .40** .21** −.32** −.32**

1 .06** .12** .57** −.23** −.49**

1 .10** −.15** −.06** .11**

1 .36** −.60** −.65**

1 −.63** −.41**

1 .54**

1

*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

Niger, Senegal, Swaziland, and Tanzania. The moderate-legitimacy countries included Cameroon, Cote d’Ivoire, Ghana, Guinea, Lesotho, Madagascar, Mali, South Africa, Sudan, Togo, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. The four countries in the low-legitimacy column were Kenya, Liberia, Nigeria, and Sierra Leone. Regarding the individual variables, half (50%) of the respondents were male and the average age was about 37, with the youngest being 18 and the oldest 105. A minority of the respondents were employed (32%) and lived in urban areas of their respective countries (37%). For the country-level variables, the average corruption rate for the 29 countries was 34.93 (SD = 10.92), and that for peacefulness was 2.10 (SD = 0.41). Moreover, the average impact of terrorism was 2.45 with a standard deviation of 2.65; the average rate of victimisation was 0.17 (SD = 0.38) and level of democracy was 2.07 (SD = 0.65). According to the respondents’ accounts, about 11% lived in non-democratic countries, 30% in countries with major democracy problems, 37% in countries with minor democracy problems, and 21% in full democratic countries. The bivariate correlations among variables were examined. As shown in Table 2, police legitimacy was significantly and positively correlated with age (r = .05**) and satisfaction with democracy (r = .20**). This suggests that older people and those who were satisfied with democracy perceived the police as more legitimate. However, employed individuals, those who lived in urban areas, people who reported being fearful, and those who had previously been victimised expressed lower perceptions of legitimacy. The results for the correlation between the country-level variables and legitimacy are shown in Table 3. Institutional corruption (r = −.10**) and impact of terrorism (r = −.13**) both had negative significant relationships with police legitimacy. This pattern implies that countries that have higher rates of institutional corruption and experience more terrorism have lower police legitimacy. Similarly, lack of democracy (r = .07**) and democracy with a major problem (r = .07) had negative significant relationships with legitimacy. On the other hand, legitimacy was positively and significantly related with peacefulness (r = .07**) and full democracy (r = .14**). Countries that are peaceful and fully democratic enjoy higher perceptions of police legitimacy in the eyes of the public. These

10

F. D. BOATENG

results suggest that level of democracy matters in explaining citizens’ evaluations of police legitimacy.

Multilevel findings: individual- and country-level predictors of police legitimacy To explore the effects of both individual- and country-level indicators of police legitimacy, the current analysis adopted a hierarchical nonlinear modelling approach using the logit link function. Three models are presented in Table 4. Model 1, the unconditional model, included only the grandmean-centred dependent variable. The result shows that the variation in police legitimacy at country level was significant, x 2(28) = 3189.48, p < .001, with a random coefficient reliability of 0.990. The results for the individual-level effects are shown in Model 2 (columns 5 to 7). At this level, when other variables were held constant, satisfaction with democracy and age had significantly positive relationships with police legitimacy. Being satisfied with democracy and being older are associated with higher perceptions of police legitimacy. Moreover, employment, location, fear of crime, and victimisation were negatively associated with perceptions of legitimacy. Thus, people that were employed, lived in urban areas, reported higher levels of fear of crime, and had previously been victimised, were most likely to express lower perceptions of police legitimacy. In congruence with the findings from the simple correlation, gender had no statistical significance with police legitimacy in the HLM analysis. To test the study’s five hypotheses about police legitimacy and country-level indicators, predicting variables were included at Level 2 (Model 3): institutional corruption, peacefulness, impact of terrorism, average victimisation, and three dummies of level of democracy. Consistent with H1 and H5, level of democracy and peacefulness influenced citizens’ evaluations of police legitimacy in their country. Specifically, citizens living in countries with full democracy tended to have higher perceptions of legitimacy than those living in countries with problematic democracy, either minor or major. Furthermore, compared to people in full democratic countries, those living in countries with no democracy had lower log odds of perceiving the police as legitimate. Moreover, citizens living in a peaceful country had higher log odds of believing that the police were legitimate than those living in less peaceful countries. Table 4. Predictors of police legitimacy (N = 32,060)1. Model one Intercept Individual-level effects Satisfaction with democracy Gender-male Age Employed Location – urban Fear of crime Victimisation Country-level effects Institutional corruption Peacefulness Impact of terrorism Average victimisation Level of democracy2 Not a democracy Democracy w/major problem Democracy w/minor problem Variance components u0

Model two

Model three

b (SE)

t

eb

b (SE)

t

eb

b (SE)

t

eb

−.68 (.13)

−5.22**

.51

−.71 (.13)

−5.36**

.49

−.71 (.10)

−6.96**

.49

.89 (.06) .04 (.03) .01 (.01) −.21 (.03) −.37 (.06) −.03 (.01) −.09 (.04)

14.38** 1.33 4.23** −5.90** −6.39** −2.85* −2.34*

2.43 1.04 1.00 .81 .69 .97 .91

.89 (.06) .04 (.03) .01 (.01) −.21 (.03) −.37 (.06) −.03 (.01) −.09 (.04)

14.38** 1.33 4.23** −5.90** −6.39** −2.85* −2.34*

2.43 1.04 1.00 .81 .69 .97 .91

.01 (.01) .13 (.35) −.06 (.07) 0.2 (.17)

1.10 .39* −.84 .09

1.01 1.03 .94 1.02

.50

X 2(28) = 3189.48**

.52

X 2 (28) = 2967.87**

−4.62 (1.62) −3.20 (1.58) −7.97 (1.86) .41

−2.85* .01 −2.03* .04 −4.28*** .50 X 2 (21) = 2027.69**

Notes: 1 = Final estimates of fixed effects – Unit-specific model with robust standard errors are provided in this Table. The original sample size was 45,589 but during the HLM analyses, was reduced to 32,060 after deleting missing cases. 2 = The comparison category is a country with full democracy. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

POLICING AND SOCIETY

11

Institutional corruption, average rate of victimisation, and impact of terrorism had no statistical significance with police legitimacy when other variables were controlled. These results not only fail to support H2, H3, and H4, but also indicate that people living in countries with higher rates of corruption and victimisation, as well as countries that have been seriously affected by terrorism, do not view police legitimacy differently from those living in countries where these problems are virtually nonexistent.

Discussion and conclusion In the attempt to explain variations in citizens’ evaluations of police legitimacy, past research mainly focused on individual-level variables using cross-sectional data obtained primarily from Western societies. Moreover, these studies paid little or no attention to the effects of country-specific variables, limiting our understanding of the potency of these variables in shaping police legitimacy. To address this issue, the current study used a multilevel approach to model perceptions of police legitimacy among African citizens living across 29 countries. The primary aim was to examine the impact of five country-level variables (institutional corruption, peacefulness, impact of terrorism, average victimisation, and level of democracy) on police legitimacy. The results from the hierarchical nonlinear modelling technique revealed three observable patterns. First, this study found a significant relationship between level of democracy and legitimacy. People living in fully democratic countries with no problems had higher perceptions of police legitimacy than those living in countries that were not democratic or had significant democratic problems. This finding not only supports the argument that citizens living in democratic countries have more favourable attitudes towards the police than those in authoritarian nations (Cao and Zhao 2005), but also is in congruence with past observations (Cao et al. 2012, Hsieh and Boateng 2015). In most countries, the police are symbols of democracy and their actions determine governmental legitimacy. They play an important role in sustaining democratic principles and upholding fundamental human rights. In a strong democratic society, the police are trained to avoid the use of repressive and authoritarian tactics, and instead use strategies that denote a true democratic police force. Therefore, it is not surprising that citizens will evaluate police legitimacy based on the level of democracy in their country. Second, a positive effect of peacefulness was observed in the current analysis, suggesting that people living in peaceful countries tend to perceive the police as more legitimate than those in less peaceful societies do. This observation is very significant, given that prior research has barely examined the nexus between level of peace and citizens’ attitudes towards the police. A peaceful society is one without war or threat of war, and in this society, people go about their daily routines without much worries. Cao and his colleagues have observed a positive relationship between happiness (which denotes the presence of peace or signifies peace of mind) and attitudes towards the police (Cao et al. 1998, Cao and Stack 2005, Cao and Dai 2006). However, the present analysis found no statistically significant relationship between impact of terrorism and police legitimacy. In the literature, two major perspectives have been offered to explain the influence of terrorism on legitimacy: one argues that terrorism reduces legitimacy and the other assumes otherwise. The current study’s position is that the impact of terrorism is unrelated to citizens’ evaluations of police legitimacy. Third, this study assessed the effect of individual-level factors on police legitimacy after controlling country-level effects. Consistent with previous studies that have used within-country data, this comparative study suggests that older people and those who are satisfied with democracy have higher perceptions of police legitimacy. Moreover, the multilevel analysis indicates that people in urban areas, the employed, those with higher levels of fear of crime, and citizens who had previously been victimised express lower perceptions of police legitimacy. Overall, these results show a pattern of demographic and attitudinal differences on evaluations of police legitimacy (see Powell et al. 2008, Jang et al. 2010, Boateng 2016). However, contrary to the findings of Boateng et al.

12

F. D. BOATENG

(2016) and Morris (2015), the current study found no gender differences in citizens’ assessments of police legitimacy. The present study has a few limitations, mainly because of the use of secondary data. Although using secondary data has numerous advantages, such as having access to low-cost and highquality representative data, its drawbacks were evident in the present study. First, the study’s measurement of police legitimacy was not completely satisfactory because of the use of a single item. Police legitimacy is a multifaceted concept and cannot be fully examined with just one item asking people about their levels of trust in the police. In future comparative studies, it would be beneficial to measure legitimacy with a multiple-item approach, asking questions that delve into a variety of police behaviours and actions. Secondly, the use of secondary data prevented the current analysis from including neighborhood-specific variables such as police visibility, access to police resources, and proximity of police stations, or individual variables like media exposure, contact with police, and ethnicity. Future studies should include these variables to advance our knowledge of their effects on police legitimacy across nations. In conclusion, despite the above limitations, the current multilevel multinational study improved our understanding of the factors that influence police legitimacy. The findings confirmed the arguments that levels of democracy and peacefulness in a country significantly shape people’s views about whether the police are legitimate or illegitimate. Thus, the results of the current study indicate that beyond the more commonly studied individual and attitudinal factors, the assessment of country-level characteristics may lead to a better and more holistic understanding of police legitimacy. The findings further suggest that, to gain and maintain legitimacy, police administrators should not overemphasise reforming the structural aspects of the organisation, but should focus on reorienting the police in such a way that the police can effectively eliminate violence, create a peaceful atmosphere, and promote democratic values in their society.

Notes 1. These countries were Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Cote d’Ivoire, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. 2. The GTI is based on data from the Global Terrorism Database (GTD), which is collected and collated by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism.

Disclosure statement No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

References Afrobarometer, 2016. Survey data [online]. Available from: www.afrobarometer.org [Accessed 15 June 2016]. Bayley, D.H. and Weisburd, D., 2009. Cops and spooks: The role of police in counterterrorism. In: D. Weisburd, T. Feucht, I. Hakimi, L. Mock, & S. Perry, eds. To protect and to serve. New York: Springer, 81–99. Beare, M.E. and Murray, T., 2007. Police and government relations: who’s calling the shots? Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Boateng, F.D., 2016. Neighborhood-level effects on trust in the police a multilevel analysis. International criminal justice review, 26 (3), 217–236. Boateng, F.D. and Darko, I.N., 2016. Our past the effect of colonialism on policing in Ghana. International journal of police science & management, 18 (1), 13–20. Boateng, F.D., Lee, H.D., and Abess, G., 2016. Analyzing citizens’ reported levels of confidence in the police: a crossnational study of public attitudes toward the police in the United States and South Korea. Asian journal of criminology, 11 (4), 289–308. Bradford, B., Murphy, K., and Jackson, J., 2014. Officers as mirrors: policing, procedural justice and the (re)production of social identity. British journal of criminology, 54 (4), 527–550.

POLICING AND SOCIETY

13

Brown, K. and Coulter, P. B., 1983. Subjective and objective measures of police service delivery. Public administration review, 43 (1), 50–58. Cao, L. and Dai, M., 2006. Confidence in the police: where does Taiwan rank in the world? Asian criminology, 1, 71–84. Cao, L. and Hou, C., 2001. A comparison of confidence in the police in China and in the United States. Journal of criminal justice, 29 (2), 87–99. Cao, L. and Stack, S., 2005. Confidence in the police between America and Japan: results from two waves of surveys. Policing: An international journal of police strategies and management, 28 (1), 139–151. Cao, L. and Zhao, J.S., 2005. Confidence in the police in Latin America. Journal of criminal justice, 33, 403–412. Cao, L., Frank, J., and Cullen, F.T., 1996. Race, community context and confidence in police. American journal of police, 15 (1): 3–22. Cao, L., Stack, S., and Sun, Y., 1998. Public confidence in the police: a comparative study between Japan and America. Journal of criminal justice, 26, 279–289. Cao, L., Lai, Y.-L., and Zhao, R., 2012. Shades of blue: confidence in the police in the world. Journal of criminal justice, 40 (1), 40–49. Chanley, V. A., 2002. Trust in government in the aftermath of 9/11: determinants and consequences. Political psychology, 23 (3), 469–483. Chu, Y.-H., et al., 2008. Public opinion and democratic legitimacy. Journal of democracy, 19 (2), 74–87. Coser, L.A., 1956. The functions of social conflict (Vol. 9). Routledge. Fishman, G., 2005. Balanced police action between terror and maintaining public order: a summary of an era and challenges for coming years. Jerusalem: The Israel Democracy Institute (in Hebrew). Flexon, J.L., Lurigio, A.J., and Greenleaf, R.G., 2009. Exploring the dimensions of trust in the police among Chicago juveniles. Journal of criminal justice, 37, 180–189. Frazier, L.S., 2007. The loss of public trust in law enforcement [online]. Available from: http://libcat.post.ca.gov/dbtw-wpd/ documents/cc/40-frazier.pdf [Accessed 20 January 2012]. Gau, J.M., et al., 2012. Examining macro-level impacts on procedural justice and police legitimacy. Journal of criminal justice, 40, 333–343. Global Peace Index, 2015. Measuring peace, its causes and its economic value. Institute for Economic & Peace [online]. Available form http://economicsandpeace.org/ [Accessed 5 Jan 2016]. Goldsmith, A., 2005. Police reform and the problem of trust. Theoretical criminology 9 (4), 443–470. Goldstein, H., 1977. Policing a free society. Policing a Free Society Cambridge, MA: Ballinger. Goodman-Delahunty, J., 2010. Four ingredients: new recipes for procedural justice in Australian policing. Policing, 4 (4), 403–410. Hasisi, B., Alpert, G. P., and Flynn, D., 2009. The impacts of policing terrorism on society: lessons from Israel and the US. In: D. Weisburd, T. Feucht, I. Hakimi, L. Mock, & S. Perry, eds. To protect and to serve. New York, NY: Springer, 177–202. Hawdon, J., 2008. Legitimacy, trust, social capital, and policing styles: a theoretical statement. Police quarterly, 11, 182– 201. Horowitz, J., 2007. Making every encounter count: building trust and confidence in the police. NIJ journal, 256, 8–11. Hough, M., 2012. Researching trust in the police and trust in justice: a UK perspective. Policing and society: An international journal of research and policy, 22 (3), 332–345. Hough, M. and Roberts, J.V., 2004. Youth crime and youth justice: public opinion in England and Wales. Criminal Policy Monograph. Bristol: Policy Press. Hough, M., et al., 2010. Procedural justice, trust, and institutional legitimacy. Policing: A journal of policy and practice, 4, 203–210. Howell, B.A., 2004. Seven weeks: the making of the USA PATRIOT Act. Geoge Washington Law Review, 72 (6), 1145. Hsieh, M.L. and Boateng, F.D., 2015. Perceptions of democracy and trust in the criminal justice system a comparison between mainland China and Taiwan. International criminal justice review, 25 (2), 153–173. Huang, W. and Vaughn, M., 1996. Support and confidence: public attitudes toward the police. In: T. Flanagan and D. Longmire, eds. American view crime and justice: a National Public Opinion Survey. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 31–45. Huddy, L. and Feldman, S., 2011. Americans respond politically to 9/11: understanding the impact of the terrorist attacks and their aftermath. American psychologist, 66 (6), 455–467. Hurst, Y.G. and Frank, J., 2000. How kids view cops: the nature of juvenile attitudes toward the police. Journal of criminal justice, 28, 189–202. Jackson, J. and Bradford, B., 2010. What is trust and confidence in the police? Policing: A journal of policy and practice, 4, 241–248. Jackson, J., et al., 2012. Why do people comply with the law? Legitimacy and the influence of legal institutions. British journal of criminology, 52 (6), 1051–1071. Jang, H., Joo, H.J., and Zhao, J.S., 2010. Determinants of public confidence in police: an international perspective. Journal of criminal justice, 38 (1), 57–68. Jesilow, P., Meyer, J.A., and Namazzi, N., 1995. Public attitudes towards the police. American journal of police, 14, 67–88. Jonathan, T., 2010. Police involvement in counter-terrorism and public attitudes towards the police in Israel—1998–2007. British journal of criminology, 50, 748–771.

14

F. D. BOATENG

Jonathan-Zamir, T. and Weisburd, D., 2011. The effects of security threats on antecedents of police legitimacy: findings from a quasi-experiment in Israel. Journal of research in crime & delinquency, 50 (1), 3–32. Jonathan-Zamir, T., Hasisi, B., and Margalioth, Y., 2016. Is it the what or the how? The roles of high-policing tactics and procedural justice in predicting perceptions of hostile treatment: the case of security checks at Ben-Gurion airport, Israel. Law and society review, 50 (3), 608–638. Kaariainen, J., 2007. Trust in the police in 16 European countries: A multilevel analysis. European journal of criminology, 4 (4):409–435. Karstedt, S. and LaFree, G., 2006. Democracy, crime, and justice. The annals of the American academy of political and social science, 605, 6–23. Landau, M.J., et al., A., 2004. Deliver us from evil: the effects of mortality salience and reminders of 9/11 on support for President George W. Bush. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 30 (9), 1136–1150. Lee, H.D, Boateng, F.D. and Marenin, O., 2015. Trust in and legitimacy of the police among American college students: a preliminary assessment. Police journal: theory, practice, and principles, 88 (4), 299–314. Marenin, O., 1983. Supporting the local police: the difference group basis of varieties of support. Police studies, 6, 50–56. Marenin, O., 1990. The police and the coercive nature of the state. In: E.S. Greenberg and T. Mayer, eds. Changes in the state: causes and consequences. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 115–130. Mazerolle, L., et al., 2013. Procedural justice and police legitimacy: a systematic review of the research evidence. Journal of experimental criminology. DOI:201310.1007/s11292-013-9175-2. Memmo, D., Sartor, G., and di Cardano, G.Q., 2003. Trust, reliance, good faith, and the law. In: P. Nixon and S. Terzis, eds. Proceedings of the first international conference on trust management. LNCS 2692. Heraklion, Crete, 150–164. Morgan, M. ed., 2009. The impact of 9/11 on politics and war: The day that changed everything? New York: Palgrave Macmillan, xvii, 264. Morris, C., 2015. An international study on public confidence in police. Police practice and research, 16 (5), 416–430. Mueller, J.E., 1973. War, presidents and public opinion. New York, NY: Wiley. Murphy, K., 2009. Public satisfaction with police: the importance of procedural justice and police performance in policecitizen encounters. Australian & New Zealand journal of criminology, 42 (2), 159–178. Murphy, K. and Cherney, A., 2012. Fostering cooperation with the police: how do ethnic minorities in Australia respond to procedural justice-based policing? Australian & New Zealand journal of criminology, 44:235–257. Murphy, D.W. and Worrall, J.L., 1999. Residency requirements and public perceptions of the police in large municipalities. Policing: An international journal of police strategies & management, 22, 327–342. Norris, P., 1999. Critical citizens: global support for democratic government. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Norris, P., 2011. Democratic deficit: critical citizens revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Panagopoulos, C., 2006. The polls-trends Arab and Muslim Americans and Islam in the aftermath of 9/11. Public opinion quarterly, 70 (4), 608–624. Parker, S.L., 1995. Towards an understanding of “rally” effects public opinion in the Persian Gulf war. Public opinion quarterly, 59 (4), 526–546. Pérez, O.J., 2003. Democratic legitimacy and public insecurity: crime and democracy in El Salvador and Guatemala. Political science quarterly, 118 (4), 627–644. Powell, M.B, Skouteris, H., and Murfett, R., 2008. Children’s perceptions of the role of police: a qualitative study. International journal of police science and management, 10 (4): 464–473. Raudenbush, S.W. and Bryk, A.S., 2002. Hierarchical linear models: applications and data analysis methods. 2nd ed. Thousand Oak, CA: Sage. Reiner, R., 2010. The politics of the police. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Reisig, M.D. and Parks, R.B., 2000. Experience, quality of life and neighborhood context: a hierarchical analysis of satisfaction with police. Justice quarterly, 17, 607–630. Reisig, M.D., Tankebe, J., and Mesko, G., 2012. Procedural justice, police legitimate, and public cooperation with the police among young Slovene adults. Journal of criminology and security, 14, 147–164. Ren, L., et al., 2005. Linking confidence in police with the performance of the police: community policing can make a difference. Journal of criminal justice, 33, 55–66. Reynolds, K.M., Semukhina, O.B., and Demidov, N.N., 2008. A longitudinal analysis of public satisfaction with the police in the Volgograd Region of Russia 1998–2005. International criminal justice review, 18, 158–189. Rockmore, T., 2011. Before and after 9/11: a philosophical examination of globalization, terror, and history. New York: Bloomsbury. Rosenbaum, D.P., et al., 2005. Attitudes toward the police: The effects of direct and vicarious experience. Police quarterly, 8, 343–365. Sabet, D.M., 2012. Corruption or insecurity? Understanding dissatisfaction with Mexico’s police. Latin American politics and society, 55 (1), 1–45. Sigelman, L. and Conover, P.J., 1981. The dynamics of presidential support during international conflict situations: the Iranian hostage crisis. Political behavior, 3 (4), 303–318. Silva Forné, C., 2009. Policía y encuentros con la ciudadanía en ciudad nezahualcóyotl. Doctoral diss. El Colegio de México. Simmel, G., 1955. Conflict and the web of group affiliations. New York, NY: The Free.

POLICING AND SOCIETY

15

Stoutland, S.E., 2001. The multiple dimensions of trust in residential police relationship in Boston. Journal of research in crime and delinquency, 38 (3), 226–256. Sunshine, J. and Tyler, R.T., 2003. The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in shaping public support for policing. Law & society review, 37, 513–548. Tankebe, J., 2013. Viewing things differently: The dimensions of public perceptions of police legitimacy. Criminology, 51 (1), 103–135. Thomas, C.W., and Hyman, J.M., 1977. Perceptions of crime, fear of victimization, and public perceptions of police performance. Journal of police science and administration, 5 (3), 305–317. Tyler, T., 1990. Why people obey the law. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Tyler, T.R., 1997. The psychology of legitimacy: a relational perspective on voluntary deference to authorities. Personality and social psychology review, 1 (4), 323–345. Tyler, T.R., 2004. Enhancing police legitimacy. The ANNALS of the American academy of political and social science, 593 (1), 84–99. Tyler, R.T., 2005. Policing in black and White: ethnic group differences in trust and confidence in the police. Police quarterly 8 (3), 322–342. Tyler, T.R., 2006. Why people obey the law. 2nd ed. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Tyler, T.R. and Huo, Y.J., 2002. Trust in the Law: encouraging public cooperation with the police and court. New York, NY: Russell Sage. Tyler, R.T., Schulhofer, S., and Huq, A.Z., 2010. Legitimacy and deterrence effects in counterterrorism policing: a study of Muslim Americans. Law and society review, 44 (2), 365–402. Weber, M., 1968. Economy and society. New York, NY: Bedminster Press (Original work published in 1921). Weisburd, D., Jonathan, T., and Perry, S., 2009. The Israeli model for policing terrorism goals, strategies, and open questions. Criminal justice and behavior, 36 (12), 1259–1278. Weisburd, D., et al., 2010. Terrorist threats and police performance a study of Israeli communities. British journal of criminology, 50 (4), 725–747. Weitzer, R. and Tuch, S.A., 1999. Race, class, and perceptions of discrimination by the police. Crime and delinquency, 45 (4), 494–507. Weitzer, R. and Tuch, S.A., 2005. Determinants of public satisfaction with the police. Police quarterly 8 (3), 279–297. Wexler, C., 2014. PERF and BJA release 2 reports defining legitimacy and procedural justice in policing. Subject to Debate. A Newsletter of the Police Executive Research Forum 28(1): 1. Available from: http://www.policeforum.org/assets/docs/ Subject_to_Debate/Debate2014/debate_2014_janfeb.pdf. Whitehead, J.W. and Aden, S.H., 2002. Forfeiting enduring freedom for homeland security: a constitutional analysis of the USA patriot Act and the justice department’s anti-terrorism initiatives. American University Law Review, 51 (6), 1081– 1133. Wu, Y., Sun, I.Y., and Triplett, R.A., 2009. Race, class, or neighborhood context: which matters more in measuring satisfaction with police? Justice quarterly, 26, 125–156. You, J.S., 2006. A comparative study of corruption, inequality, and social trust: institutions, intervention, and ethnic conflict. Doctoral dissertation. Harvard University. Zhao, S., Scheider, M., and Thurman, Q., 2002. The effect of police presence on public fear reduction and satisfaction: a review of the literature. The justice professional, 15, 273–299.

16

F. D. BOATENG

Appendix: Police legitimacy by country.