Cited by 189Policing Practices and PerceptionsCriminal Justice and PenologyPublic Policy and Administration Research

Measuring Procedural Justice in Police-Citizen Encounters

Jonathan-Zamir, Tal, Mastrofski, Stephen D., Moyal, Shomron·2015·Justice Quarterly

Abstract

Procedural justice has dominated recent discussions of police interactions with the public. It has mostly been measured from the perspective of citizens (using surveys or interviews), but several important questions about predictors and outcomes of fair police treatment are best answered using direct observations of police-citizen interactions. Building on prior observational studies, we develop and validate an instrument for measuring procedural justice as it is exercised by the police in the natural setting of their encounters with the public. In doing so, we adopt a “formative” rather than the common “reflective” approach, based on the assumption that specific behaviors that make up procedural justice do not reflect a single underlying construct but rather form one. We justify this approach and validate our instrument accordingly. We also discuss the implications of our measurement for future research on procedural justice in police behavior.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/07418825.2013.845677

Cites

74 of 74 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jonathan-Zamir, T., Mastrofski, S. D., & Moyal, S.
Affiliations
  • Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
  • George Mason University (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
Corresponding author
Jonathan-Zamir, Tal
Venue
Justice Quarterly
Published
2013-10-29
Volume
32
Issue
5
Pages
845-871
ISSN
  • 0741-8825 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-9109
OpenAlex
W2035119545
Cited by
189
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 4
FWCI
49.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Justice Quarterly (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • George Mason University
  • US-UK Fulbright Commission
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Policing Practices and Perceptions
  • Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
  • Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
Keywords
procedural justice, police-citizen encounters, police behavior, scale development, formative measurement, reflective measurement, police legitimacy, observational assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review