The Psychology of Legitimacy: A Relational Perspective on Voluntary Deference to Authorities
Abstract
People within organized groups often internalize their feelings of obligation to obey group rules and the decisions of group authorities. They believe that group authorities and rules are legitimate and, hence, entitled to be obeyed. Because of this belief, group members voluntarily accept and obey rules and decisions from group authorities. This review draws on evidence from studies of authorities in political, legal, managerial, educational, and family settings to explore why people view as legitimate and voluntarily defer to group authorities. Two theories about legitimacy are contrasted: resource-based theories, represented by instrumental models, and identification based theories, represented by the relational model. The findings provide strong support for the existence of a relational component of legitimacy, suggesting that authorities draw an important part of their legitimacy from their social relationship with group members. The findings also show that there is an instrumental component to legitimacy. Hence, the psychology of legitimacy involves both instrumental and relational elements.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Citizens are more likely to comply with police directives when they view the police as legitimate.
“Contemporary research continues to show that citizens are more likely to comply with police directives when they view the police as legitimate (Tyler, 1990”
From Legitimacy in Policing: A Systematic Review (2013) · cites this paper as Tyler, 1997
Cites
Comparative fit indexes in structural models.
Bentler, P. M. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238 · Cited by 25,266 · see citing works
The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.117.3.497 · Cited by 23,245 · see citing works
Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix.
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0046016 · Cited by 17,116 · see citing works
The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (2004) · Political Psychology · doi:10.4324/9780203505984-16 · Cited by 13,467 · see citing works
The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988) · Critical Issues in Social Justice · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-2115-4 · Cited by 6,585 · see citing works
Self-citationA Relational Model of Authority in Groups
Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60283-x · Cited by 2,977 · see citing works
Self-citationParsons, T. (1963) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1086/267148 · Cited by 434 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Social Influence: Compliance and Conformity
Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142015 · Cited by 6,077 · see citing works
A Social Identity Theory of Leadership
Hogg, M. A. (2001) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0503_1 · Cited by 2,298 · see citing works
Mohr, D. C., Cuijpers, P., & Lehman, K. (2011) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.1602 · Cited by 1,097 · see citing works
Constructing and contesting legitimacy and accountability in polycentric regulatory regimes
Black, J. (2008) · Regulation & Governance · doi:10.1111/j.1748-5991.2008.00034.x · Cited by 1,215 · see citing works
Hogg, M. A. (2007) · Advances in experimental social psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(06)39002-8 · Cited by 990 · see citing works
Uncertainty management by means of fairness judgments
van den Bos, K., & Lind, E. A. (2002) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(02)80003-x · Cited by 913 · see citing works
Public Satisfaction With Police: Using Procedural Justice to Improve Police Legitimacy
Hinds, L., & Murphy, K. (2007) · Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology · doi:10.1375/acri.40.1.27 · Cited by 594 · see citing works
Encouraging public cooperation and support for police
Murphy, K., Hinds, L., & Fleming, J. (2008) · Policing and Society · doi:10.1080/10439460802008660 · Cited by 361 · see citing works
Murphy, K., Tyler, T. R., & Curtis, A. (2009) · Regulation & Governance · doi:10.1111/j.1748-5991.2009.01043.x · Cited by 313 · see citing works
Self-citationGau, J. M. (2011) · Journal of Criminal Justice · doi:10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2011.09.004 · Cited by 250 · see citing works
Legitimacy in Policing: A Systematic Review
Mazerolle, L., Bennett, S., Davis, J., Sargeant, E., & Manning, M. (2013) · Campbell Systematic Reviews: Better Evidence for a Better World · doi:10.4073/csr.2013.1 · Cited by 224 · see citing works
“Contemporary research continues to show that citizens are more likely to comply with police directives when they view the police as legitimate (Tyler, 1990, 1997; see also Tyler, 1988, 1994, 1998, 2001, 2003, 2004; Tyler & Fagan, 2008; Tyler & Huo, 2002).”
BackgroundMethodSantarossa, S., Kane, D., Senn, C. Y., & Woodruff, S. J. (2018) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.8480 · Cited by 172 · see citing works
When computers take the lead: The automation of leadership
Wesche, J. S., & Sonderegger, A. (2019) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.07.027 · Cited by 157 · see citing works
Ebert, D. D., Lehr, D., Heber, E., Riper, H., Cuijpers, P., & Berking, M. (2016) · Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health · doi:10.5271/sjweh.3573 · Cited by 120 · see citing works
Cavanagh, C., & Cauffman, E. (2015) · Psychology, Public Policy, and Law · doi:10.1037/law0000054 · Cited by 95 · see citing works
Ebert, D. D., Lehr, D., Smit, F., Zarski, A.-C., Riper, H., Heber, E., Cuijpers, P., & Berking, M. (2014) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/1471-2458-14-807 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
Ebert, D. D., Buntrock, C., Lehr, D., Smit, F., Riper, H., Baumeister, H., Cuijpers, P., & Berking, M. (2018) · Behavior Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.beth.2017.05.004 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
Han, J. H., Liao, H., Han, J., & Li, A. N. (2021) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/peps.12415 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
- Authors
- Tyler, T. R.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Berkeley (US)
- Corresponding author
- Tyler, Tom R.
- ORCID
- Tyler, Tom R.
- Venue
- Personality and Social Psychology Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1997-11
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 323-345
- ISSN
- 1088-8683 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7957
- OpenAlex
- W2152711479
- Cited by
- 755
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2026: 26 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 49 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 39 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 36 · 2016: 36 · 2015: 35 · 2014: 36 · 2013: 35 · 2012: 34
- FWCI
- 22.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Personality and Social Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Psychology of Social Influence
- Keywords
- legitimacy, authority, obedience, relational legitimacy, resource-based view, group rules, interpersonal relationships, political authority, family authority, educational authority, managerial authority
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
