Element contents
Series: Elements in Criminology
The Hidden Measurement Crisis in Criminology
Procedural Justice as a Case Study
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 March 2025
Summary
The field of criminology is limited by a 'hidden' measurement crisis. It is hidden because scholars either are not aware of the shortcomings of their measures or have implicitly agreed that scales with certain properties merit publication. It is a crisis because the approaches used to construct measures do not employ modern systematic psychometric methods. As a result, the degree to which existing measures have methodological limitations is unknown. The purpose of this Element is to unmask this hidden crisis and provide a case study demonstrating how to build a measure of a prominent criminological construct through modern systematic psychometric methods. Using multiple surveys and item response theory, it develops a ten-item scale of procedural justice in policing. This can be used in primary research and to adjudicate existing measures. The goal is to reveal the nature of the field's measurement crisis and show a strategy for solving it.
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Series: Elements in CriminologyOnline ISBN: 9781009558549Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 27 March 2025
References
Akaike, H. (1974). A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19(6), 716–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
American Educational Research Association (AERA), American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). The standards for educational and psychological testing. American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
American Psychological Association. (2020). Journal article reporting standards (JARS). https://apastyle.apa.org/jars.Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, S., & Schaffner, B. F. (2014). Does survey mode still matter? Findings from a 2010 multi-mode comparison. Political Analysis, 22(3), 285–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Antonaccio, O., & Tittle, C. R. (2008). Morality, self‐control, and crime. Criminology, 46(2), 479–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, T. A., Lee, D. R., & Armstrong, G. S. (2009). An assessment of scales measuring constructs in tests of criminological theory based on national youth survey data. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 46(1), 73–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, F. B. (2001). The basics of item response theory. Educational Resources Information Center ( ERIC) Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation.Google Scholar
Bates, L., Allen, S., & Watson, B. (2016). The influence of the elements of procedural justice and speed camera enforcement on young novice driver self-reported speeding. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 92(1), 34–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, M. H. (2021). Deciding to support violence: An empirical examination of systematic decision-making, activism, and support for political violence. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 21(5), 669–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238–246.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernard, T. J. (1990). Twenty years of testing theories: What have we learned and why? Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 27(4), 325–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolger, P. C., & Walters, G. D. (2019). The relationship between police procedural justice, police legitimacy, and people’s willingness to cooperate with law enforcement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Criminal Justice, 60(1), 93–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandl, S. G., Frank, J., Worden, R. E., & Bynum, T. S. (1994). Global and specific attitudes toward the police: Disentangling the relationship. Justice Quarterly, 11(1), 119–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, A. (2018). Item response theory approaches to test scoring and evaluating the score accuracy. In Irwing, P., Booth, T., & Hughes, D. (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of psychometric testing (pp. 607–638). John Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In Bollen, K. A. & Long, J. S. (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Sage.Google Scholar
Burt, C. H. (2019). Response to “Why longitudinal research is hurting criminology” (March/April 2019) Misguided culprit: Blame bad practices not longitudinal data. The Criminologist, 44(4), 13–14.Google Scholar
Canales, R., Gonzalez Magaña, M., Francisco Santini, J., & Cherem Maus, A. (2020). Assessing the effectiveness of procedural justice training for police officers: Evidence from the Mexico City Police. Working paper.Google Scholar
Chandler, J., Higgins, J. P. T., Deeks, J. J., Davenport, C., & Clarke, M. J. (2017, February). Chapter 1: Introduction. In Higgins, J. P. T., Churchill, R., Chandler, J., & Cumpston, M. S. (Eds). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.2.0. Cochrane.Google Scholar
Chang, L., & Krosnick, J. A. (2009). National surveys via RDD telephone interviewing versus the internet: Comparing sample representativeness and response quality. Public Opinion Quarterly, 73(4), 641–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 309–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cliff, N. (1988). The eigenvalues-greater-than-one rule and the reliability of components. Psychological Bulletin, 103(2), 276–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cullen, F. T., Pratt, T. C., & Graham, A. (2019a). Beefing up criminology: Longitudinal research is not the only answer. The Criminologist, 44(4), 19–20.Google Scholar
Cullen, F. T., Pratt, T. C., & Graham, A. (2019b). Why longitudinal research is hurting criminology. The Criminologist, 44(2), 1–7.Google Scholar
Czapska, J., Radomska, E., & Wójcik, D. (2014). Police legitimacy, procedural justice, and cooperation with the police: A Polish perspective. Varstvoslovje: Journal of Criminal Justice and Security, 16(4), 453–470.Google Scholar
Dai, M. (2007). Procedural justice during police–citizen encounters. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Cincinnati). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (UMI Number: 3280116).Google Scholar
Dai, S., Vo, T. T., Kehinde, O. J., He, H., Xue, Y., Demir, C., & Wang, X. (2021). Performance of polytomous IRT models with rating scale data: An investigation over sample size, instrument length, and missing data. Frontiers in Education, 6, p. 721963. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.721963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawis, R. V. (1987). Scale construction. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 34(4), 481–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Ayala, R. J. (1994). The influence of multidimensionality on the graded response model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 18(2), 155–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeVellis, R. F. (2012). Scale development: Theory and applications (applied social research methods). 3rd edition. Sage.Google Scholar
Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method. John Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckert, R. (2009). Community policing as procedural justice: An examination of Baltimore residents after the implementation of a community policing strategy. (Master’s thesis, Villanova University). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (UMI Number: 1462400).Google Scholar
Elman, B. A. (2013). The civil examination system in late imperial China, 1400–1900. Frontiers of History in China, 8(1), 32–50.Google Scholar
Elliott, I., Thomas, S. D., & Ogloff, J. R. (2011). Procedural justice in contacts with the police: Testing a relational model of authority in a mixed methods study. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 17(4), 592–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engel, R. S., McManus, H. D., & Herold, T. D. (2020). Does de-escalation training work? A systematic review and call for evidence in police use-of-force reform. Criminology & Public Policy, 19(3), 721–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Social Survey. (2011). Round 5 Module on Trust in the Police and Courts-Question Design Template Draft 1. Centre for Comparative Social Surveys, City University London.Google Scholar
European Social Survey. (2024). Prospectus. www.europeansocialsurvey.org/sites/default/files/2024-04/prospectus_updated.pdf.Google Scholar
Fancher, R. E. (1998). Biography and psychodynamic theory: Some lessons from the life of Francis Galton. History of Psychology, 1(2), 99–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flora, D. B., LaBrish, C., & Chalmers, R. P. (2012). Old and new ideas for data screening and assumption testing for exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, Article 55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ford, J. K., MacCallum, R. C., & Tait, M. (1986). The application of exploratory factor analysis in applied psychology: A critical review and analysis. Personnel Psychology, 39(2), 291–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, J., Brandl, S. G., Worden, R. E., & Bynum, T. S. (1996). Citizen involvement in the coproduction of police outputs. Journal of Crime and Justice, 19(2), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furr, M. (2011). Scale construction and psychometrics for social and personality psychology. Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallup, Inc. (2019). Party affiliation. https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/partyaffiliation.aspx.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(6), 489–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gau, J. M. (2014). Procedural justice and police legitimacy: A test of measurement and structure. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 39(2), 187–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gau, J. M. (2015). Procedural justice, police legitimacy, and legal cynicism: A test for mediation effects. Police Practice and Research, 16(5), 402–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilljam, M., & Granberg, D. (1993). Should we take don’t know for an answer? Public Opinion Quarterly, 57(3), 348–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gomes, H. S., Farrington, D. P., Maia, Â., & Krohn, M. D. (2019). Measurement bias in self-reports of offending: A systematic review of experiments. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 15, 313–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, A., Haner, M., Sloan, M. M., Cullen, F. T., Kulig, T. C., & Jonson, C. L. (2020). Race and worrying about police brutality: The hidden injuries of minority status in America. Victims & Offenders, 15(5), 549–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, A., Kulig, T. C., & Cullen, F. T. (2019). Willingness to report crime to the police: Traditional crime, cybercrime, and procedural justice. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management, 43(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, A., McManus, H. D., Cullen, F. T., Burton, V. S. Jr., & Jonson, C. L. (2019). Videos don’t lie: African Americans’ support for body-worn cameras. Criminal Justice Review, 44(3), 284–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, A., Pickett, J. T., & Cullen, F. T. (2021). Advantages of matched over unmatched opt-in samples for studying criminal justice attitudes: A research note. Crime & Delinquency, 67(12), 1962–1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, A., Pratt, T. C., & McLean, K. (2020). Procedural justice. In Chouhy, C., Cochran, J. C., & Jonson, C. L. (Eds.), Criminal justice theory: Explanations and effects (Advances in Criminological Theory, Vol. 26, pp. 199–220). Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grasmick, H. G., Tittle, C. R., Bursik, R. J., Jr., & Arneklev, B. J. (1993). Testing the core empirical implications of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30(1), 5–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hambleton, R. K., & Jones, R. W. (1993). Comparison of classical test theory and item response theory and their applications to test development. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 12(3), 38–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory (Vol. 2). Sage.Google Scholar
Harkin, D. (2015). Police legitimacy, ideology and qualitative methods: A critique of procedural justice theory. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 15(5), 594–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harper, C. C., & McLanahan, S. S. (2004). Father absence and youth incarceration. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 14(3), 369–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higgins, G. E. (2007). Examining the original Grasmick scale: A Rasch model approach. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34(2), 157–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holt, T. J., Bossler, A. M., & May, D. C. (2012). Low self-control, deviant peer associations, and juvenile cyberdeviance. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 37, 378–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, T. (1936). The history of measurement in psychology. In Hunt, T., Measurement in psychology (pp. 23–56). Prentice-Hall. https://doi.org/10.1037/11336-003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ivkovic, S. K. (2014). Police misconduct. In Resig, M. D. & Kane, R. J. (Eds.) The Oxford handbook of police and policing (pp. 302–338). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jackson, J., & Bradford, B. (2010). What is trust and confidence in the police? Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 4(3), 241–248.CrossRefGoogle 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 & Society Review, 48(4), 947–978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 141–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, R. S. (2000). Explaining girls’ and women’s crime and desistance in the context of their victimization experiences: A developmental test of revised strain theory and the life course perspective. Violence Against Women, 6(6), 633–660.Google Scholar
Kempf, K. (1993). The empirical status of Hirschi’s control theory. In Adler, F. & Laufer, W. S. (Eds.), New directions in criminological theory (Advances in Criminological Theory, Vol. 4, pp. 143–185). Transaction.Google Scholar
Kempf-Leonard, K. (2019). The status of Hirschi’s social control theory after 50 years. In Oleson, J. C. & Costello, B. (Eds.), Fifty years of Causes of Delinquency: Criminological essays in honor of Travis Hirschi (Advances in Criminological Theory, Vol. 25, pp. 161–208). Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, B., Gerber, J., Henderson, C., & Kim, Y. (2012). Applicability of general power-control theory to prosocial and antisocial risk-taking behaviors among women in South Korea. The Prison Journal, 92(1), 125–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kobayashi, E., Vazsonyi, A. T., Chen, P., & Sharp, S. F. (2010). A culturally nuanced test of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s “general theory”: Dimensionality and generalizability in Japan and the United States. International Criminal Justice Review, 20(2), 112–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships. In Gergen, K. J., Greenberg, M. S., & Willis, R. H. (Eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research (pp. 27–55). Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loevinger, J. (1957). Objective tests as instruments of psychological theory. Psychological Reports, 3, 635–694.Google Scholar
MacQueen, S., & Bradford, B. (2015). Enhancing public trust and police legitimacy during road traffic encounters: Results from a randomised controlled trial in Scotland. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 11(3), 419–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madon, N. S., Murphy, K., & Williamson, H. (2023). Justice is in the eye of the beholder: A vignette study linking procedural justice and stigma to Muslims’ trust in police. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 19(3), 761–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maguire, E. R., & Johnson, D. (2010). Measuring public perceptions of the police. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 33(4), 703–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masters, E. R. (1974). The relationship between number of response categories and reliability of Likert‐type questionnaires. Journal of Educational Measurement, 11(1), 49–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masters, G. N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47(2), 149–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mastrofski, S. D., Jonathan-Zamir, T., Moyal, S., & Willis, J. J. (2016). Predicting procedural justice in police–citizen encounters. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 43(1), 119–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2015). Evaluating fit in IRT models. In Reise, S. P. & Revicki, D. A. (Eds.), Handbook of item response theory modeling: Applications to typical performance assessment (pp. 111–127). Routledge.Google Scholar
Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2013). Goodness-of-fit assessment of item response theory models. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 11(3), 71–101.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(1), 33–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazerolle, L., Bates, L., Bennett, S., White, G., Ferris, J., & Antrobus, E. (2015). Optimising the length of random breath tests: Results from the Queensland Community Engagement Trial. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 48(2), 256–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazerolle, L., Bennett, S., Antrobus, E., & Eggins, E. (2012). Procedural justice, routine encounters and citizen perceptions of police: Main findings from the Queensland Community Engagement Trial (QCET). Journal of Experimental Criminology, 8(4), 343–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazerolle, L., Bennett, S., Davis, J., Sargeant, E., & Manning, M. (2013). Procedural justice and police legitimacy: A systematic review of the research evidence. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 9(3), 245–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meade, A. W., & Wright, N. A. (2012). Solving the measurement invariance anchor item problem in item response theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(5), 1016–1031.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50(9), 741–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, K. (2009). Procedural justice and affect intensity: Understanding reactions to regulatory authorities. Social Justice Research, 22(1), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, K. (2023). Encouraging minority trust and compliance with police in a procedural justice experiment: How identity and situational context matter. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 26(4), 816–832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, K., Bradford, B., Sargeant, E., & Cherney, A. (2022). Building immigrants’ solidarity with police: Procedural justice, identity and immigrants’ willingness to cooperate with police. British Journal of Criminology, 62(2), 299–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, K., Hinds, L., & Fleming, J. (2008). Encouraging public cooperation and support for police. Policing and Society, 18(2), 136–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, K., McVie, S., Farren, D., Herlitz, L., Hough, M., & Norris, P. (2021). Procedural justice, compliance with the law and police stop-and-search: A study of young people in England and Scotland. Policing and Society, 31(3), 263–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nägel, C., & Nivette, A. E. (2023). Unexpected events during survey design and trust in the police: A systematic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 19(4), 891–917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nalla, M. K., & Nam, Y. (2021). Corruption and trust in police: Investigating the moderating effect of procedural justice. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 65(6–7), 715–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Netemeyer, R. G., Bearden, W. O., & Sharma, S. (2003). Scaling procedures: Issues and applications. Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niemi, R. G., Carmines, E. G., & McIver, J. P. (1986). The impact of scale length on reliability and validity: A clarification of some misconceptions. Quality and Quantity, 20, 371–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nix, J., Campbell, B. A., Byers, E. H., & Alpert, G. P. (2017). A bird’s eye view of civilians killed by police in 2015: Further evidence of implicit bias. Criminology & Public Policy, 16(1), 309–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nunnally, J. C. (1975). Psychometric theory: 25 years ago and now. Educational Researcher, 4(10), 7–21.Google Scholar
Osborne, J. W. (2015). What is rotating in exploratory factor analysis? Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 20(2), 1–8.Google Scholar
Osgood, D. W., McMorris, B. J., & Potenza, M. T. (2002). Analyzing multiple-item measures of crime and deviance I: Item response theory scaling. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 18, 267–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osterlind, S. J., & Everson, H. T. (2009). Differential item functioning. Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paternoster, R., Brame, R., Mazerolle, P., & Piquero, A. (1998). Using the correct statistical test for the equality of regression coefficients. Criminology, 36(4), 859–866.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peer, E., Vosgerau, J., & Acquisti, A. (2014). Reputation as a sufficient condition for data quality on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Behavior Research Methods, 46(4), 1023–1031.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Research Center, Pew. (2024, May 23). Public’s positive economic ratings slip: Inflation still widely viewed as major problem. Pew Research Center.Google Scholar
Pickett, J. T., & Baker, T. (2014). The pragmatic American: Empirical reality or methodological artifact? Criminology, 52(2), 195–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piquero, A. R., MacIntosh, R., & Hickman, M. (2000). Does self‐control affect survey response? Applying exploratory, confirmatory, and item response theory analysis to Grasmick et al.’s self‐control scale. Criminology, 38(3), 897–930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pratt, T. C. (2015). Theory testing in criminology. Piquero, A. R. (Ed.), The handbook of criminological theory (pp. 37–49). John Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pratt, T. C., & Cullen, F. T. (2000). The empirical status of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime: A meta‐analysis. Criminology, 38(3), 931–964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. (2015). Final Report of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.Google Scholar
Psychometric Society (n.d.) History of the Psychometric Society. www.psychometricsociety.org/history.Google Scholar
Putnick, D. L., & Bornstein, M. H. (2016). Measurement invariance conventions and reporting: The state of the art and future directions for psychological research. Developmental Review, 41, 71–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rebellon, C. J., Trinkner, R., Van Gundy, K. T., & Cohn, E. S. (2019). No guts, no glory: The influence of risk-taking on adolescent popularity. Deviant Behavior, 40(12), 1464–1479.CrossRefGoogle 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(8), 1005–1028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rivers, D. (2007, August 1). Sampling for web surveys. Prepared for the 2007 Joint Statistical Meetings, Salt Lake City, UT.Google Scholar
Sahin, N. M., Braga, A. A., & Apel, R. (2024). Procedural fairness, socioeconomic status, and driver perceptions of the police during traffic stops: A test of the invariance thesis. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 20(4), 1175–1191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sahin, N., Braga, A. A., Apel, R., & Brunson, R. K. (2017). The impact of procedurally-just policing on citizen perceptions of police during traffic stops: The Adana randomized controlled trial. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 33(4), 701–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometric Monograph No. 17. Psychometric Society.Google Scholar
Sampson, R. J. (2012). Great American city: Chicago and the enduring neighborhood effect. University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sampson, R. J., & Groves, W. B. (1989). Community structure and crime: Testing social-disorganization theory. American Journal of Sociology, 94(4), 774–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277(5328), 918–924.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simmons, A. D., & Bobo, L. D. (2015). Can non-full-probability internet surveys yield useful data? A comparison with full-probability face-to-face surveys in the domain of race and social inequality attitudes. Sociological Methodology, 45(1), 357–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simms, L. J. (2008). Classical and modern methods of psychological scale construction. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(1) 414–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singer, L. (2013). London riots: Searching for a stop. Policing: A Journal of Policy & Practice, 7(1), 32–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singleton, R., & Straits, B. (2010). Approaches to social research. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Spector, P. E. (1992). Summated rating scale construction: An introduction (Vol. 82). Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Springer (2024). Psychometrica: Aim and scope. https://link.springer.com/journal/11336/aims-and-scope.Google Scholar
Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25(2), 173–180.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sullivan, C. J., & McGloin, J. M. (2014). Looking back to move forward: Some thoughts on measuring crime and delinquency over the past 50 years. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 51(4), 445–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sunshine, J., & Tyler, T. R. (2003a). The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in shaping public support for policing. Law & Society Review, 37(3), 513–548.CrossRefGoogle 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(2), 153–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tangney, J. P., Baumeister, R. F., & Boone, A. L. (2004). High self-control predicts good adjustment, less pathology, better grades, and interpersonal success. Journal of Personality, 72(2), 271–332.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Têng, S. Y. (1943). Chinese influence on the Western examination system. Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 7(4), 267–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thibaut, J. W., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1978). A theory of procedure. California Law Review, 66(3), 541–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thissen, D., Pommerich, M., Billeaud, K., & Williams, V. S. (1995). Item response theory for scores on tests including polytomous items with ordered responses. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19(1), 39–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, A. J., & Pickett, J. T. (2020). Are relational inferences from crowdsourced and opt-in samples generalizable? Comparing criminal justice attitudes in the GSS and five online samples. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 36(4), 907–932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trinkner, R. (2023). Toward measuring objective procedural justice: Commentary on Terpstra and van Wijck (2022). Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 60(3), 378–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trinkner, R., Jackson, J. & Tyler, T. R. (2018). Bounded authority: Expanding “appropriate” police behavior beyond procedural justice. Law and Human Behavior, 42(3), 280–293.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38(1), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyler, T. (2017). Procedural justice and policing: A rush to judgment? Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 13, 29–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyler, T. R. (1988). What is procedural justice? Criteria used by citizens to assess the fairness of legal procedures. Law & Society Review, 22, 103–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyler, T. R. (1989). The psychology of procedural justice: A test of the group-value model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(5), 830–838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyler, T. R. (2000). Social justice: Outcome and procedure. International Journal of Psychology, 35(2), 117–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyler, T. R. (2004). Enhancing police legitimacy. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 593(1), 84–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2000). Cooperation in groups: Procedural justice, social identity, and behavioral engagement. Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R., & Folger, R. (1980). Distributional and procedural aspects of satisfaction with citizen–police encounters. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 1(4), 281–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. (2002). Trust in the law: Encouraging public cooperation with the police and courts. Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 115–191). Academic Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, T., & Nobo, C. (2022). Legitimacy-based policing and the promotion of community vitality. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Van Damme, A. (2013). The roots and routes to compliance and citizens’ cooperation with the Belgian police. Journal of Police Studies/Cahiers Politiestudies, 1(1), 40–63.Google Scholar
Van Damme, A., Pauwels, L., & Svensson, R. (2015). Why do Swedes cooperate with the police? A SEM analysis of Tyler’s procedural justice model. European Journal on Criminal Policy & Research, 21(1), 15–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Hall, M., Dirkzwager, A. J., van der Laan, P. H., & Nieuwbeerta, P. (2023). Differential effects of procedural justice? Examining heterogeneity in the perceptions and effects of procedural justice across first-time and recurrent detainees. Crime & Delinquency. Advance online, https://doi.org/00111287231155924.Google Scholar
van Veen, F., & Sattler, S. (2020). Modeling updating of perceived detection risk: The role of personal experience, peers, deterrence policies, and impulsivity. Deviant Behavior, 41(4), 413–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, J., & Maddan, S. (2008). Statistics in criminology and criminal justice: Analysis and interpretation. Jones & Bartlett Learning.Google Scholar
Walters, G. D., & Bolger, P. C. (2019). Procedural justice perceptions, legitimacy beliefs, and compliance with the law: A meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 15(3), 341–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warland, R. H., & Sample, J. (1973). Response certainty as a moderator variable in attitude measurement. Rural Sociology, 38(2), 174–186.Google Scholar
Watkins, M. W. (2018). Exploratory factor analysis: A guide to best practice. Journal of Black Psychology, 44(3), 219–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weems, G. H., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2001). The impact of midpoint responses and reverse coding on survey data. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34(3), 166–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisburd, D., & Braga, A. A. (Eds.). (2006). Police innovation: Contrasting perspectives. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisburd, D., & Piquero, A. R. (2008). How well do criminologists explain crime? Statistical modeling in published studies. Crime and Justice, 37(1), 453–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisburd, D., Telep, C. W., Vovak, H., Zastrow, T., Braga, A. A., & Turchan, B. (2022). Reforming the police through procedural justice training: A multicity randomized trial at crime hot spots. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(14), e2118780119.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wikström, P. O. H., & Kroneberg, C. (2022). Analytic criminology: Mechanisms and methods in the explanation of crime and its causes. Annual Review of Criminology, 5, 179–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, G., Tyler, T. R., & Papachristos, A. V. (2020). Procedural justice training reduces police use of force and complaints against officers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(18), 9815–9821.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Worden, R. E., & McLean, S. J. (2017). Mirage of police reform: Procedural justice and police legitimacy. University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Worden, R. E., McLean, S. J., Engel, R. S., Cochran, H., Corsaro, N., Reynolds, D., … & Isaza, G. T. (2020). The impacts of implicit bias awareness training in the NYPD. The John F. Finn Institute.Google Scholar
Yang, F. M., & Kao, S. T. (2014). Item response theory for measurement validity. Shanghai Archives of Psychiatry, 26(3), 171–177.Google ScholarPubMed
Zwick, W. R., & Velicer, W. F. (1986). Comparison of five rules for determining the number of components to retain. Psychological Bulletin, 99(3), 432–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2
- Cited by