The importance of procedural justice for reducing criminal behavior has been demonstrated in numerous criminal justice contexts. However, to date, no study has evaluated the impact of procedural justice in encounters with multiple authorities on recidivism. Using longitudinal data from the Prison Project, this study examines the associations between perceptions of prison staff procedural justice, probation officer procedural justice, and recidivism during a 12-month follow-up period. Findings indicate that detainees who felt treated fairly by prison staff, perceived their probation officer to be fairer, and, subsequently, they had a lower likelihood of getting reconvicted. How prison staff are perceived by people in prison may impact those people’s perceptions of their probation officers which in turn may affect their offending behavior.
AlwardL. M.BakerT. (2021). Justice-involved males’ procedural justice perceptions of the police and courts: Examining the spill-over effect. Criminal Justice Studies, 34(1), 33–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/1478601X.2019.1706876
2.
AlwardL. M.BakerT.GordonJ. A. (2021). Procedural justice and incarcerated people’s obligation to obey institutional rules: An examination of current, former, and never-gang members. Journal of Criminal Justice, 73, 101757. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2020.101757
3.
AugustynM. B. (2016). Updating perceptions of (In)Justice. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 53(2), 255–286. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427815616991
4.
BakerT.AbderhaldenF. P.AlwardL. M.BedardL. E. (2021). Exploring the association between procedural justice in jails and incarcerated people’s commitment to institutional rules. Corrections, 6(3), 198–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/23774657.2019.1618224
5.
BakerT.GauJ. M. (2018). Female offenders’ perceptions of police procedural justice and their obligation to obey the law. Crime & Delinquency, 64(6), 758–781. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128717719418
6.
BakerT.PelfreyW. V.BedardL. E.DhunganaK.GertzM.GoldenK. (2014). Female inmates’ procedural justice perceptions of the police and courts: Is there a spill-over of police effects?Criminal Justice and Behavior, 41(2), 144–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854813497479
7.
BarkworthJ. M.MurphyK. (2021). Procedural justice, posturing and defiant action: Exploring prisoner reactions to prison authority. Justice Quarterly, 38(3), 537–564. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2019.1666905
8.
BeijersbergenK. A.DirkzwagerA. J. E.EichelsheimV. I.Van der LaanP. H.NieuwbeertaP. (2015). Procedural justice, anger, and prisoners’ misconduct: A longitudinal study. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 42(2), 196–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854814550710
9.
BeijersbergenK. A.DirkzwagerA. J. E.NieuwbeertaP. (2016). Reoffending after release: Does procedural justice during imprisonment matter?Criminal Justice and Behavior, 43(1), 63–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854815609643
10.
BlaskoB. L.TaxmanF. S. (2018). Are supervision practices procedurally fair? Development and predictive utility of a procedural justice measure for use in community corrections settings. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 45(3), 402–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854817749255
11.
BosmaA. Q.van GinnekenE. F. J. C.SentseM.PalmenH. (2020). Examining prisoner misconduct: A multilevel test using personal characteristics, prison climate, and prison environment. Crime & Delinquency, 66(4), 451–484. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128719877347
12.
BrownS. J.TramontanoC.McKillopN.SmallboneS.WortleyR. (2018). Sex offenders’ perceptions of the police and courts: Are there spill-over effects?Criminal Justice and Behavior, 45(3), 364–380. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854817739043
13.
BucknerZ.MartinS.NorrisK.WalkerD. (2023). Does procedural justice matter in probation? Investigating the relationship between procedural just treatment and law-abiding behavior among a sample of high-risk offenders. Crime & Delinquency. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00111287231211265
14.
CampbellC. M.LabrecqueR. M.SchaeferR. L.HarvisM.Rose ZavitaK.ReddyL.LabrancheK. (2020). Do perceptions of legitimacy and fairness matter in prison? Examining how procedural and distributive justice relate to misconduct. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 47(12), 1630–1653. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854820916901
15.
CasperJ. D.TylerT. R.FisherB. (1988). Procedural justice in felony cases. Law & Society Review, 22(3), 483–508. https://doi.org/10.2307/3053626
16.
De JongsteW. M. (2022). Het Nederlandse strafrechtsysteem. In MeijerR. F.MolenaarD. E. G.ChoenniR.Van den BraakS. W. (Eds.), Criminaliteit en rechtshandhaving 2021: Ontwikkelingen en samenhangen (pp. 15–46). WODC.
17.
DervanL. E. (2011). American prison culture in an international context: An examination of prisons in America, The Netherlands, and Israel. Stanford Law & Policy Review, 22(2), 413–428.
18.
DirkzwagerA. J. E.KruttschnittC. (2012). Prisoners’ perceptions of correctional officers’ behavior in English and Dutch prisons. Journal of Criminal Justice, 40(5), 404–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2012.06.004
19.
DirkzwagerA. J. E.NieuwbeertaP.BeijersbergenK. A.BosmaA. Q.de CuyperR.DoekhieJ.EichelsheimV.de GoedeS.van der LaanP. H.LametW.PalmenH.RaaijmakersE.RamakersA.ReefJ.van der SteltS.WensveenM.WerminkH. (2018). Cohort profile: The prison project—a study of criminal behavior and life circumstances before, during, and after imprisonment in the Netherlands. Journal of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology, 4(1), 120–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40865-017-0077-2
20.
DownesD. (1988). Contrasts in tolerance: Post-war penal policies in the Netherlands and England and Wales. Clarendon.
21.
FaganJ.PiqueroA. R. (2007). Rational choice and developmental influences on recidivism among adolescent felony offenders. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 4(4), 715–748. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-1461.2007.00105.x
22.
HendersonH.WellsW.MaguireE. R.GrayJ. (2010). Evaluating the measurement properties of procedural justice in a correctional setting. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37(4), 384–399. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854809360193
23.
JacksonJ.TylerT. R.BradfordB.TaylorD.ShinerM. (2010). Legitimacy and procedural justice in prisons. Prison Service Journal, 191, 4–10.
24.
LinckensP.De LooffJ. (2012). Gevangeniswezen in getal 2007-2011. Dienst Justitiele Inrichtingen.
25.
LindE. A.TylerT. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. Plenum.
26.
MaguireE. R.Atkin-PlunkC. A.WellsW. (2021). The effects of procedural justice on cooperation and compliance among inmates in a work release program. Justice Quarterly, 38(6), 1128–1153. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2019.1634753
27.
McCarthyD.Brunton-SmithI. (2018). The effect of penal legitimacy on prisoners’ postrelease desistance. Crime & Delinquency, 64(7), 917–938. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128716687291
28.
MengerA. (2018). De werkalliantie in het gedwongen kader. Eburon.
29.
MurphyK.BradfordB.JacksonJ. (2016). Motivating compliance behavior among offenders: Procedural justice or deterrence?Criminal Justice and Behavior, 43(1), 102–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854815611166
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), 225–237. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000055
32.
PetersiliaJ. (2011). Beyond the prison bubble. The Wilson Quarterly, 35(1), 50–55.
RyanC.BerginM. (2022). Procedural justice and legitimacy in prisoners: A review of the extant empirical literature. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 49(2), 143–163. https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548211053367
35.
SparksJ. R.BottomsA. E. (1995). Legitimacy and order in prisons. British Journal of Sociology, 46(1), 45–62.
36.
SprottJ. B.GreeneC. (2010). Trust and confidence in the courts:does the quality of treatment young offenders receive affect their views of the courts?Crime & Delinquency, 56(2), 269–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128707308176
37.
SteinerB.WooldredgeJ. (2015). Examining the sources of correctional officer legitimacy. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 105(3), 679–704.
38.
SteinerB.WooldredgeJ. (2018). Prison officer legitimacy, their exercise of power, and inmate rule breaking. Criminology, 56(4), 750–779. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12191
39.
TangneyJ. P.BaumeisterR. F.Luzio-BooneA. (2004). High self-control predicts good adjustment, less pathology, better grades and interpersonal success. Journal of Personality, 72(2), 271–322. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00263.x.
40.
ThibautJ. W.WalkerL. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Erlbaum.
41.
TostlebeJ. J.PyroozD. C. (2022). Procedural justice, legal orientations, and gang membership: Testing an alternative explanation to understand the gang-misconduct link. Criminology, 60, 700–739. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12316
42.
TylerT. R. (2006). Why people obey the law. Princeton University Press.
43.
TylerT. R.FaganJ.GellerA. (2014). Street stops and police legitimacy: Teachable moments in young urban men’s legal socialization. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 11(4), 751–785. https://doi.org/10.1111/jels.12055
44.
TylerT. R.HuoY. (2002). Trust in the law: Encouraging public cooperation with the police and courts. Russell Sage Foundation.
45.
TylerT. R.LindE. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In ZannaM. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 115–191). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60283-X
46.
Van GinnekenE. F. J. C.BosmaA. Q.PasmaA.PalmenH. (2020). Unhappy staff, unhappy prisoners? The relation between work climate and prison climate in Dutch prisons. Kriminologie - Das Online Journal, 2(2), 182–200. https://doi.org/10.18716/ojs/krimoj/2020.2.5
47.
Van HallM.DirkzwagerA. J. E.Van der LaanP. H.NieuwbeertaP. (2022). Detainees’ perceptions of procedural justice: An examination throughout the criminal justice system. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X221132229
48.
Van HallM.DirkzwagerA. J. E.Van der LaanP. H.NieuwbeertaP. (2023a). Differential effects of procedural justice? Examining heterogeneity in the perceptions and effects of procedural justice across first-time and recurrent detainees. Crime & Delinquency. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00111287231155924
49.
Van HallM.DirkzwagerA. J. E.Van der LaanP. H.NieuwbeertaP. (2023b). Exploring the linkage between changes in detainees’ perceptions of procedural justice and changes in misconduct. Psychology, Crime & Law. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2023.2207019
50.
Van HallM.DirkzwagerA. J. E.Van der LaanP. H.NieuwbeertaP. (2023c). Procedural justice, perceived legitimacy, and reoffending behavior: In police and court setting. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 50(12), 1874–1892. https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548231206833
51.
Van HallM.BakerT.DirkzwagerA. J. E.NieuwbeertaP. (2024). Perceptions of probation officer procedural justice and recidivism: A longitudinal study in the Netherlands. Criminal Justice and Behavior. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548241244502
52.
Van KalmthoutA. M.TiggesL. (2008). Netherlands. In van KalmthoutA. M.DurnescuI. (Eds.), Probation in Europe (pp. 677–725). Wolf Legal Publishers.
53.
WalsmleyR. (2014). World pre-trial/remand imprisonment list (2nd ed.). International Centre for Prison Studies.
54.
WartnaB. S. J.BlomM.TollenaarN. (2011). The Dutch recidivism monitor. WODC.
55.
WhiteM. D.MulveyP.DarioL. M. (2016). Arrestees’ perceptions of the police: Exploring procedural justice, legitimacy, and willingness to cooperate with police across offender types. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 43(3), 343–364. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854815602501
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
