The legitimacy of authorities is paramount to their ability to exercise their powers. We examine truanting students’ and their parents’ perceptions of the legitimacy of authorities in the context of the adapted family group conference component of the Ability School Engagement Program (ASEP), a police–school partnership aimed at reducing antisocial behavior. To evaluate the program, 102 truanting students were randomly allocated to a control or the ASEP condition. Students’ and their parents’ perceptions of authorities were collected to explore how this intervention component, specifically designed to encourage legitimacy views through procedural justice, impacted perceptions of police and school staff. Results indicated that parents participating in ASEP conferences showed significant changes in their perceptions of legitimacy of authorities. ASEP parents’ perceptions of police increased following the conference, but parental perceptions of school legitimacy appeared to be affected by perceptions of the procedural justness (or unjustness) of specific authority figures in the conference. Parental views of school authorities were driven by the few school representatives who failed to engage families in procedurally just ways. Students themselves showed little change in their views following the ASEP conference, suggesting the conference alone was not sufficient for bringing about changes in student perceptions of authority legitimacy.
AcuttA. (2018). Encouraging school re-engagement: Exploring the operation of the legal mechanisms of a Third Party Policing school engagement intervention (Doctoral dissertation). The University of Queensland, Australia.
2.
AgnewR. (1985).
Social control theory and delinquency: A longitudinal test. Criminology,
23(1), 47–61.
3.
BakerM.SigmonJ.NugentM. (2001). Truancy reduction: Keeping students in school.
Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
4.
BazemoreG.StinchcombJ. B.LeipL. A. (2004).
Scared smart or bored straight? Testing deterrence logic in an evaluation of police-led truancy intervention. Justice Quarterly,
21(2), 269–299.
5.
BennettS.MazerolleL.AntrobusE.EgginsE. (2017).
Truancy intervention reduces crime: Results from a randomized field trial. Justice Quarterly 35(2), 309–329.
6.
BradfordB. (2014).
Policing and social identity: Procedural justice, inclusion and cooperation between police and public. Policing and Society,
24(1), 22–43.
7.
BraithwaiteJ. (2002). Restorative justice and responsive regulation.
Oxford, England:
Oxford University Press.
8.
CavanaghC.CauffmanE. (2015).
Viewing law and order: Mothers’ and sons’ justice system legitimacy attitudes and juvenile recidivism. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law,
21(4), 432.
9.
Chory-AssadR. M. (2002).
Classroom justice: Perceptions of fairness as a predictor of student motivation, learning, and aggression. Communication Quarterly,
50, 58–77.
10.
CohenJ. (1992).
Statistical power analysis. Current Directions in Psychological Science,
1(3), 98–101.
11.
DonatM.UmlauftS.DalbertC.KambleS. V. (2012).
Belief in a just world, teacher justice, and bullying behavior. Aggressive Behaviour,
38, 185–193.
12.
DonoghueJ. (2011).
Truancy and the prosecution of parents: An unfair burden on mothers?The Modern Law Review,
74(2), 216–244.
13.
EmlerN.ReicherS. (1987).
Orientations to institutional authority in adolescence. Journal of Moral Education,
16(2), 108–116.
14.
EmlerN.ReicherS. (1995). Adolescence and delinquency – The collective management of reputation.
Oxford, England:
Blackwell.
15.
EmlerN.ReicherS. (2005). Delinquency: Cause or consequence of social exclusion? In AbramsD.HoggM. A.MarquesJ. M. (Eds.), The social psychology of inclusion and exclusion (pp. 211–241).
New York, NY:
Psychology Press.
16.
FaganJ.PiqueroA. R. (2007).
Rational choice and developmental influences on recidivism among adolescent felony offenders. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies,
4, 715–748.
17.
FaganJ.TylerT. R. (2005).
Legal Socialization of Children and Adolescents. Social Justice Research,
18, 217–242.
18.
GewandterJ. S.DworkinR. H.TurkD. C.McDermottM. P.BaronR.GastonguayM. R.SennS. (2014).
Research designs for proof-of-concept chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. Pain,
155(9), 1683–1695.
19.
Gouveia‐PereiraM.ValaJ.CorreiaI. (2016). Teachers’ legitimacy: Effects of justice perception and social comparison processes. British Journal of Educational Psychology, online first.
20.
Gouveia-PereiraM.ValaJ.PalmonariA.RubiniM. (2003).
School experience, relational justice and legitimation of institutional authorities. European Journal of Psychology of Education,
18(3), 309–325.
21.
GregoryA.RipskiM. B. (2008).
Adolescent trust in teachers: Implications for behavior in the high school classroom. School Psychology Review,
37, 337–353.
22.
Howell, D. C. (2010). Statistical Methods for Psychology (7th ed.). Wadsworth: Cengage Learning.
23.
JacksonJ.BradfordB.HoughM.MyhillA.QuintonP.TylerT. R. (2012).
Why do people comply with the law? Legitimacy and the influence of legal institutions. British Journal of Criminology,
52, 1051–1071.
24.
JacksonJ.HuqA. Z.BradfordB.TylerT. R. (2013).
Monopolizing force? Police legitimacy and public attitudes toward the acceptability of violence. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law,
19(4), 479–497.
25.
JenkinsP. H. (1997).
School delinquency and the school social bond. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency,
34(3), 337–367.
26.
JonesS. (2014).
A last resort: The prosecution of parents for their child’s truancy. Child and Family Law Quarterly,
26, 322.
27.
KearneyC. A. (2008).
School absenteeism and school refusal behavior in youth: A contemporary review. Clinical Psychology Review,
28(3), 451–471.
28.
MacQueenS.BradfordB. (2017).
Where did it all go wrong? Implementation failure – and more – in a field experiment of procedural justice policing. Journal of Experimental Criminology,
13(3), 321–345.
29.
MazerolleL. (2014).
The power of policing partnerships: Sustaining the gains. Journal of Experimental Criminology,
10(3), 341–365.
30.
MazerolleL.AntrobusE.BennettS.EgginsE. (2017).
Reducing truancy and fostering a willingness to attend school: Results from a randomized trial of a police-school partnership program. Prevention Science,
18(4), 469–480.
31.
MazerolleL.AntrobusE.BennettS.TylerT. R. (2013).
Shaping citizen perceptions of police legitimacy: A randomized field trial of procedural justice. Criminology,
51(1), 33–63.
32.
MazerolleL.BennettS.AntrobusE.EgginsE. (2012).
Procedural justice, routine encounters and citizen perceptions of police: Main findings from the Queensland Community Engagement Trial (QCET). Journal of Experimental Criminology,
8, 343–367.
33.
MazerolleL.BennettS.AntrobusE.EgginsE. (2017).
The co-production of truancy control: Results from a randomized trial of a police-school partnership program. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency,
54(6), 791–823.
34.
MurphyK. (2015).
Does procedural justice matter to youth? Comparing adults’ and youths’ willingness to collaborate with police. Policing and Society,
25(1), 53–76.
35.
MurphyK.CherneyA. (2011).
Understanding cooperation with police in a diverse society. British Journal of Criminology, 51(1), 181–201.
36.
MurphyK.HindsL.FlemingJ. (2008).
Encouraging public cooperation and support for police. Policing and Society,
18(2), 136–155.
37.
PennerE. K.ViljoenJ. L.DouglasK. S.RoeschR. (2014).
Procedural justice versus risk factors for offending: Predicting recidivism in youth. Law and Human Behavior,
38(3), 225.
38.
PenningtonL. (2015).
A case study approach to procedural justice: Parents’ views in two juvenile delinquency courts in the United States. British Journal of Criminology,
55(5), 901–920.
39.
PiqueroA. R.FaganJ.MulveyE. P.SteinbergL.OdgersC. (2005).
Developmental trajectories of legal socialization among serious adolescent offenders. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology,
96, 267–298.
40.
Purdie, N., & Buckley, S. (2010). School Attendance and Retention of Indigenous Australian Students: Issues Paper No. 1 produced for the Closing the Gap Clearinghouse. Canberra, Australia: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.
41.
ReisigM. D.MaysR. D.TelepC. W. (2018).
The effects of procedural injustice during police–citizen encounters: A factorial vignette study. Journal of Experimental Criminology,
14(1), 49–58.
42.
ReisigM. D.WolfeS. E.HoltfreterK. (2011).
Legal cynicism, legitimacy, and criminal offending: The non-confounding effect of low self-control. Criminal Justice and Behavior,
38, 1265–1279.
43.
RocqueM.JenningsW. G.PiqueroA. R.OzkanT.FarringtonD. P. (2016). The importance of school attendance: Findings from the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development on the life-course effects of truancy. Crime and Delinquency 63(5), 592–612. doi: 10.0011128716660520
44.
ShermanL. W. (1993).
Defiance, deterrence and irrelevance: A theory of the criminal sanction. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency,
30, 445–473.
45.
ShermanL. W. (2007).
The power few: Experimental criminology and the reduction of harm. The 2006 Joan McCord Prize Lecture. Journal of Experimental Criminology,
3, 299–321.
46.
ShermanL. W.GottfredsonD.MacKenzieD.ReuterP.EckJ.BushwayS. (1997). Preventing crime: What works, what doesn’t, what’s promising: A report to the United States Congress.
Washington, DC:
National Institute of Justice.
47.
TappJ. L. (1991).
The geography of legal socialization: Scientific and social markers. Droit et Société,
19, 331–358.
48.
TricknerR.CohnE. (2014).
Putting the “social” back in legal socialization: Procedural justice, legitimacy, and cynicism in legal and nonlegal authorities. Law and Human Behavior,
38(6), 602–617.
49.
TylerT. R. (2003).
Procedural justice, legitimacy, and the effective rule of law. Crime and Justice: A Review of Research,
30, 283–357.
50.
TylerT. R. (2006). Why people obey the law.
Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
51.
TylerT. R. (2007).
Procedural justice and the courts. Court Review,
44, 26–164.
52.
TylerT. R.HuoY. (2002). Trust in the law: Encouraging public cooperation with the police and courts.
New York, NY:
Russell Sage Foundation.
53.
TylerT. R.ShermanL.StrangH.BarnesG. C.WoodsD. (2007).
Reintegrative shaming, procedural Justice, and recidivism: The engagement of offenders’ psychological mechanisms in the Canberra RISE Drinking‐and‐Driving Experiment. Law andSociety Review,
41(3), 553–586.
54.
VirtanenT. E.LerkkanenM. K.PoikkeusA. M.KuorelahtiM. (2014).
Student behavioral engagement as a mediator between teacher, family, and peer support and school truancy. Learning and Individual Differences,
36, 201–206.
55.
WeisburdD.PetrosinoA.MasonG. (1993).
Design sensitivity in criminal justice experiments. Crime and Justice,
17, 337–379.
56.
WhiteM. D.FyfeJ. J.CampbellS. P.GoldkampJ. S. (2001).
The school-police partnership identifying at-risk youth through a truant recovery program. Evaluation Review,
25(5), 507–532.
