Why Young People Obey Private Security Guards? A Scenario-Based Study

• Date: 01 February 2020
• Author: Samuel Moreira,Carla Cardoso
• DOI: 10.1177/1043986219890206
• Published date: 01 February 2020
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986219890206

Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice

2020, Vol. 36(1) 144 –160

© The Author(s) 2019

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/1043986219890206

journals.sagepub.com/home/ccj

Article

Why Young People Obey

Private Security Guards? A

Scenario-Based Study

Samuel Moreira1 and Carla Cardoso1

Abstract

Private security guards (PSG) are prominent social control agents in many contexts of

youth attendance. However, studies about youth’s acceptance of PSG authority are

scarce. In a scenario-based survey, this study examines youngsters’ compliance with

three types of PSG requests and explores factors influencing compliance, particularly

instrumental and normative ones. Findings from 631 high school students from the

metropolitan areas of Lisbon and Porto (Portugal) suggest that youth typically obey

PSG requests, and that perceptions about the role of PSG in protecting public interests

and normative judgments about these guards and their requests are important in

shaping compliance. Interestingly, variations according to the type of demand are

observed. Youth obey more and see their requests as more legitimate when those

requests echo shared moral positions.

Keywords

private security, youth, instrumental judgments, normative judgments, compliance

Introduction

The growth of private security worldwide in the last decades has extended policing

largely to the private sector (Bayley & Shearing, 2001; Kempa et al., 1999). These

developments created large-scale private security agencies as realms of power and

authority across civil society having capacity to impose a social order and to enforce

norms that significantly affect citizens’ lives (Crawford, 2006; Loader, 2000).

Portugal is in line with this trend. In 1996, there were 15,000 private security per-

sonnel (De Waard, 1999); this number more than doubled in 20 years and reached

1School of Criminology, Faculty of Law, University of Porto, Portugal

Corresponding Author:

Samuel Moreira, School of Criminology, Faculty of Law, University of Porto, Rua dos Bragas 223, 4050-

123 Porto, Portugal.

Email: smoreira@direito.up.pt

890206CCJXXX10.1177/1043986219890206Journal of Contemporary Criminal JusticeMoreira and Cardoso

research-article2019

Moreira and Cardoso 145

37,871 by 2017 (“Annual Report on Private Security,” 2017). The national entity in

charge of regulating private security is the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Law No.

34/2013 of May 16 asserts that the sector’s purpose is protecting persons and property

and preventing crimes. The State allows the use of private security and, in certain situ-

ations, mandates it.

Private security guards (PSG) are particularly present in spaces attended by young

people in large urban centers. However, little is known about how youngsters accept

PSG authority. This article aims to understand how young people respond to PSG by

assessing the influence of factors that may shape their decision to obey or disobey.

Background

Compliance Theories

Two main models explain compliance with authorities: instrumental and normative.

The instrumental perspective focuses on the outcomes and suggests that people shape

their behavior by responding to the immediate sanctions and rewards associated with

following the authorities’ edicts (Tyler, 1990). It argues that the public will comply

with policing authorities when (a) they create a high risk of detection and sanction for

wrongdoers; (b) they are effective in controlling crime and disorder because it is

important in shaping not only the people’s sense of the risk of being caught and pun-

ished but also the sense that people benefit from these outcomes (Hough et al., 2010;

Sunshine & Tyler, 2003).

By contrast, the normative model suggests that people defer to directives of authorities

not because of mere estimates of sanctions and rewards, but because they feel they ought

to (Tyler, 1990). This kind of compliance is linked to the perceived legitimacy, defined as

“a property of an authority or institution that leads people to feel that the authority or

institution is entitled to be deferred to and obeyed” (Sunshine & Tyler, 2003, p. 514).

Legitimacy is typically operationalized as (a) trust in the authority and (b) felt obligation

to obey the authority (Sunshine & Tyler, 2003; Tyler & Jackson, 2014). From this per-

spective, legitimacy (normative judgments) is more important than instrumental judg-

ments in shaping people’s compliance with authorities. The normative model suggests

that the fairness of procedures by the authorities when dealing with the public is the key

antecedent of people’s views on their legitimacy (Sunshine & Tyler, 2003; Tyler, 1990).

Private Security Guards as Social Control Agents

PSG operate in private, semipublic, and public places. However, with the proliferation

of “mass private property” over the last decades, that is, private properties opened to

the public (e.g., shopping malls), security personnel now operate largely in these

“hybrid” spaces (Kempa et al., 1999; Shearing & Stenning, 1983). There is some

ambivalence in academic discussions regarding the role of PSG. On one hand, some

emphasize that PSG serve the private interests of their clients and not the public inter-

est (Loader, 2000; Zedner, 2009). On the other hand, others stress that they serve the