The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Representative Bureaucracy in Policing: Does It Increase Perceived Legitimacy?
Abstract
Drawing on the theory of representative bureaucracy, specifically the theory of symbolic representation, we examine whether or not gender representativeness in a police department’s domestic violence unit influences how citizens judge the agency’s performance, trustworthiness, and fairness. To examine this question, we use an online survey experiment in which we vary the representation of female police officers in a hypothetical domestic violence unit as well as the agency’s performance. Results suggest that gender representation does indeed influence the perceived job performance, trustworthiness, and fairness of the agency, as does the agency’s performance. Thus, this study suggests that the symbolic representativeness of the police does causally influence how citizens view and judge a law enforcement agency, and thus in turn perhaps their willingness to cooperate in the coproduction of public safety outcomes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(2002) · Cited by 13,211
Fenichel Pitkin, H. (1967) · doi:10.1525/9780520340503 · Cited by 5,162
The Concept of Representation, by Hanna F. Pitkin
Mansfield, H. C. (1969) · Political Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2147153 · Cited by 3,086
Design and Analysis of Experiments
(2007) · Modern Engineering Statistics · doi:10.1002/9780470187548.ch12 · Cited by 1,424
Thompson, R. S., Bonomi, A. E., Anderson, M., Reid, R. J., Dimer, J. A., Carrell, D., & Rivara, F. P. (2006) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2006.01.016 · Cited by 1,307
Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. (1998) · PsycEXTRA Dataset · doi:10.1037/e330452004-001 · Cited by 920
(1995) · Brandeis on Democracy · doi:10.2307/j.ctv1p2gkh7.7 · Cited by 775
Lipstick and Logarithms: Gender, Institutional Context, and Representative Bureaucracy
KEISER, L. R., WILKINS, V. M., MEIER, K. J., & HOLLAND, C. A. (2002) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055402000321 · Cited by 653
Gender, Representative Bureaucracy, and Law Enforcement: The Case of Sexual Assault
Meier, K. J., & Nicholson-Crotty, J. (2006) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00653.x · Cited by 531
Democracy and the Public Service
Posey, R. B. (1968) · Public Personnel Management · doi:10.1177/009102606802900410 · Cited by 489
Cited by
Representative Bureaucracy and Attitudes Toward Automated Decision Making
Miller, S. M., & Keiser, L. R. (2021) · Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory · doi:10.1093/jopart/muaa019 · Cited by 127
Bouwman, R., & Grimmelikhuijsen, S. (2016) · International Journal of Public Sector Management · doi:10.1108/ijpsm-07-2015-0129 · Cited by 95
Baekgaard, M., & George, B. (2018) · Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory · doi:10.1093/jopart/muy038 · Cited by 54
What drives the perceived legitimacy of collaborative governance? An experimental study
Lee, S., & Esteve, M. (2023) · Public Management Review · doi:10.1080/14719037.2022.2026692 · Cited by 45
Gender and Prosecutorial Discretion: An Empirical Assessment
Baker, D. B., & Hassan, S. (2021) · Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory · doi:10.1093/jopart/muaa017 · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- Riccucci, N. M., Van Ryzin, G. G., & Lavena, C. F.
- Venue
- Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2014-03-06
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 537-551
- ISSN
- 1053-1858 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-9803
- OpenAlex
- W2151815313
- Cited by
- 382
- References
- 35
- FWCI
- 97.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Representative Bureaucracy in Policing: Does It Increase Perceived Legitimacy? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jopart/muu006
- The paper
- Riccucci, N. M., Van Ryzin, G. G., & Lavena, C. F. (2014). Representative Bureaucracy in Policing: Does It Increase Perceived Legitimacy? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muu006
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
