IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/crimin/v61y2021i4p1086-1106..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Testing the fair process heuristic in a traffic stop context: Evidence from a factorial study with video vignettes

Author

Listed:
  • Starr J Solomon
  • Joselyne L Chenane

Abstract

We explored whether distributive justice mediated the observed association between procedural justice and legitimacy, as well as cooperation with police. We distributed a 2 × 2 factorial survey to a national online sample of 560 adults. Participants were randomly assigned to view one video vignette of a traffic stop varying the components of procedural justice (decision-making and treatment quality). We used structural equation modelling to test the significance of direct and indirect effects. The results indicated that distributive justice fully mediated the effect of decision-making quality on each outcome and partially mediated the effect of treatment quality on trust and cooperation with police. Theoretical and policy implications are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Starr J Solomon & Joselyne L Chenane, 2021. "Testing the fair process heuristic in a traffic stop context: Evidence from a factorial study with video vignettes," The British Journal of Criminology, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, vol. 61(4), pages 1086-1106.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:crimin:v:61:y:2021:i:4:p:1086-1106.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/bjc/azaa096
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:crimin:v:61:y:2021:i:4:p:1086-1106.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/bjc .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.