CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 361Policing Practices and PerceptionsCriminal Justice and PenologyPublic Policy and Administration Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Encouraging public cooperation and support for police

Open access
Murphy, Kristina, Hinds, Lyn, Fleming, Jenny·2008·Policing and Society
DOI 10.1080/10439460802008660
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This paper explores how to increase public cooperation and support for police. To date, only a few studies have attempted to explore the role that procedural justice plays in shaping the public's willingness to assist police in crime control. The present study explores this much neglected field of research using both crosssectional survey data and panel data. The study finds that views about police legitimacy do influence public cooperation with the police, and that those who view the police as more legitimate are more likely to assist police to control crime. The key antecedent of legitimacy is procedural justice; those who are more likely to believe police use procedural justice in their dealings with the public are more likely to perceive police as legitimate.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10439460802008660

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 28 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. McCluskey , J.D. 2003 . Police requests for compliance: coercive and procedurally just tactics , New York, NY : LFB Scholarly .
  2. Meares , T.L. 1998 . Social organisation and drug law enforcement . American Criminal Law Review , 35 ( 2 ) : 191 – 227 .
  3. 10.1002/j.1839-4655.2003.tb01151.x · DOI
  4. 10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Tyler , T.R. 2001 . “ A psychological perspective on the legitimacy of institutions and authorities ” . In The psychology of legitimacy , Edited by: Jost , J. and Major , B. 416 – 436 . Cambridge : Cambridge University Press .
  6. Weber , M. 1968 . Economy and society , Edited by: Roth , G. and Wittich , C. New York, NY : Bedminster .

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Murphy, K., Hinds, L., & Fleming, J.
Affiliations
  • Deakin University (AU)
  • Australian National University (AU)
Corresponding author
Murphy, Kristina
ORCID
Venue
Policing and Society
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2008-05-23
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
136-155
ISSN
  • 1043-9463 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-2728
DOI
10.1080/10439460802008660
OpenAlex
W2054992558
Cited by
361
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 36 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 35 · 2012: 15
FWCI
54.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Policing & Society (publishedVersion)
  • eCite Digital Repository (University of Tasmania) (submittedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion)
Funders
Australian Research Council
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
public cooperation with police, police legitimacy, procedural justice, public support for police, crime control, police-public relations, public trust in police

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