Procedural justice and procedural fairness are terms that refer to the way legal authorities interact with the public and how those interactions shape the public’s view of those authorities. I first learned of this framework for evaluating those interactions in connection with my work with court officials. Researchers have determined that people’s assessments of their experiences in the court system are influenced more by how they are treated and how their cases are handled than by whether they win or lose. It turns out that the same principles apply to the public’s perception of law enforcement officers. And a perception of procedural justice may increase the public’s compliance with the law and their willingness to cooperate with officers. The procedural justice framework. Many criminal justice policies and enforcement practices are based on a deterrence model, which suggests that behavior is shaped by material incentives and sanctions. Tom Tyler et. al., The Impact of Psychological Science on Policing in the United States: Procedural Justice, Legitimacy, and Effective Law Enforcement, 16(3) Psychological Science in the Public Interest 75, 77 (2015) [hereinafter Impact on Policing]. Procedural justice does not reject the notion that people are motivated by incentives; instead, it incorporates a broader view, which recognizes that rewards and punishment are not all that people care about. Id. at 78. Advocates for a procedurally just approach to policing insist that the deterrent effects of punishment should be supplemented by building the legitimacy of the police force and drawing on its “motivational power to further [...]
Faculty Coordinators
