Illuminating the Concept of Community (Group)-Level Procedural Justice: A Qualitative Analysis of Protestors’ Group-Level Experiences With the Police

• Author: Gali Perry,Tal Jonathan-Zamir,David Weisburd
• Date: 01 June 2021
• DOI: 10.1177/0093854820983388
• Published date: 01 June 2021
• Subject Matter: Articles

CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2021, Vol. 48, No. 6, June 2021, 791 –809.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854820983388

Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions

© 2020 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology

791

ILLUMINATING THE CONCEPT OF

COMMUNITY (GROUP)-LEVEL

PROCEDURAL JUSTICE

A Qualitative Analysis of Protestors’ Group-Level

Experiences With the Police

TAL JONATHAN-ZAMIR

GALI PERRY

The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

DAVID WEISBURD

George Mason University

The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

“Procedural justice” (PJ) has traditionally been thought of as an intragroup model, characterizing interpersonal interactions

between police officers and specific individuals. O’Brien et al. recently proposed that PJ is also a useful framework for

examining intergroup dynamics, and can thus be used to typify interactions between the police and communities/social

groups as a whole. Yet, as a novel construct, its precise content remains unclear. We use qualitative, in-depth interviews with

individuals who encountered police as a group of protestors, to illuminate the constituent elements of group-level PJ. We

identify four concerns with group-level treatment: respect for the existence and cause of the group, partnership with the

group, recognizing the individual within the group, and displaying the “right” motivation: allowing group activities to take

place safely. We discuss the implications of our findings, arguing that they pave the way for more exhaustive modeling of the

fairness embedded in authorities’ treatment.

Keywords: policing; legitimacy; procedural justice; community (group)-level procedural justice; qualitative analysis

The theory of procedural justice (PJ) has had tremendous impact in criminology, and in

particular on the study of policing (Weisburd & Majmundar, 2018). As proposed by

Tom Tyler and others (e.g., Sunshine & Tyler, 2003; Tyler, 1990; Tyler & Huo, 2002), this

theory views the manner by which police officers interact with individual citizens as the key

to understanding broad evaluations of police legitimacy, and willingness to comply and

AUTHORS’ NOTE: Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Tal Jonathan-Zamir,

Institute of Criminology, Faculty of Law, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Mt. Scopus, Jerusalem 9190501,

Israel; e-mail: tal.jonathan@mail.huji.ac.il.

983388CJBXXX10.1177/0093854820983388Criminal Justice And BehaviorJonathan-Zamir et al./Illuminating Group-Level Procedural Justice

research-article2020

792 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR

cooperate with the police and the law. Accordingly, the micro-level interactions of policing

have become a main focus of empirical research in this area (Gau et al., 2012; Hinds &

Murphy, 2007; Kochel et al., 2013; Murphy et al., 2008; Reisig et al., 2007; Schulhofer

et al., 2011; Stoutland, 2001; Tyler, 2004, 2009; Tyler et al., 2010; Tyler & Fagan, 2008;

Tyler & Wakslak, 2004).

Recently, O’Brien et al. (2020) proposed an innovative extension of the theory of PJ (also

see Radburn & Stott, 2019). Based on the distinction between intragroup and intergroup

dynamics (Tajfel & Turner, 1979), they argue that PJ applies not only to one-on-one, offi-

cer-citizen interactions, but also to police engagement with communities (or social groups)

as a whole. Their arguments and findings (reviewed below) suggest that researchers and

practitioners should begin thinking about PJ more broadly as a model that characterizes

authorities’ treatment of citizens on both the individual and community levels. Importantly,

the idea of police interaction with communities as entities is not new, and echoes classic

models of community-oriented policing (COP; Skogan, 2006a, 2006b). However, as

detailed below, group-level PJ is different from community policing in that it seeks to pro-

vide a nuanced process model linking police engagement with communities to outcomes of

legitimacy and cooperation (O’Brien et al., 2020).

Thus, the idea of treating PJ as a two-layer model bears much potential to advance the-

ory, research, and practice in policing, as well as in other settings where dishonesty or viola-

tion of regulations is of concern (such as prisons, courts, and workplace environments). Yet,

unlike individual-level PJ and its four constituent elements that have received tremendous

theoretical and empirical attention (e.g., Jonathan-Zamir et al., 2015; Mazerolle, Bennett,

et al., 2013; Nagin & Telep, 2017; Worden & McLean, 2017), the concept of group-level PJ

is in its infancy: it is not yet clear what features of police treatment of social groups/com-

munities as a whole elicit feelings of fairness, status, and value (or lack of).

The goal of this study is to address this gap. Using a qualitative analysis of in-depth

interviews with individuals who have encountered the police as part of a group of protes-

tors, it seeks to gain better understanding of the specific characteristics of police treatment

that are the “building blocks” of group-level PJ. First, it examines if individuals intuitively

distinguish between individual- and group-level treatment by the police because if the

answer is negative, there may not be merit to the differentiation between the two levels of

PJ. If the answer is positive, the second and main question of this study is raised: how is

fairness expressed at the group-level? In other words, what concerns do people have when

engaging with the police as a social group? What features of police treatment directed at the

community as a whole convey the message that it is respected and valued? The article

begins by reviewing the traditional, individual-level approach to PJ. It continues with an

appraisal of the arguments made by O’Brien et al. (2020) that gave rise to the concept of

“group-level PJ,” while linking the discussion to the literature on COP. The data, analysis,

and findings are described next, followed by a discussion of the findings and their implica-

tions for theory and practice.

INDIVIDUAL-LEVEL PROCEDURAL JUSTICE

The concept of “procedural justice,” or “the fairness of police behavior and the processes

through which police decisions are made” (Mazerolle, Antrobus, et al., 2013, p. 36) is inte-

grated into many contemporary discussions and research on police-c ommunity relatio nships.