Considering research on juvenile delinquency more broadly, few studies have examined the legal socialization process whereby adolescents come to accept legal authority and comply with the law as a result of the interaction with informal and formal socializing agents. Police legitimacy is an important dimension of legal socialization, because the police are the visible face of the legal system and contribute to the internalization of norms and values in society. Therefore, this article aims to analyse police legitimacy perceptions as an element of the legal socialization process in Spain among a subsample of 2041 youths aged from 13 to 18 from the Third International Self-Report Delinquency Study (ISRD-3). The results using structural equation modelling reveal that adolescents who perceive the police as a legitimate institution commit fewer criminal offences. Additionally, police legitimacy perceptions mediate the association of parental monitoring, school attachment and procedural justice of the police with juvenile delinquency. Other explanations for juvenile delinquency are discussed from a legal socialization perspective.
AkersRL (1997) Deviant Behavior: A Social Learning Approach. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
2.
AkinlabiOM (2017) Young people, procedural justice, and police legitimacy in Nigeria. Policing and Society27(4): 419–438.
3.
AugustynMB (2015) The (ir)relevance of procedural justice in the pathways to crime. Law and Human Behavior39(4): 388–401.
4.
BarberBKHarmonEL (2002) Violating the self: Parental psychological control of children and adolescents. In: BarberBK (ed.) Intrusive Parenting: How Psychological Control Affects Children and Adolescents. Washington: American Psychological Association, 15–52.
5.
BarnesGMHoffmanJHWelteJWFarrellMPDintcheffBA (2006) Effects of parental monitoring and peer deviance on substance use and delinquency. Journal of Marriage and Family68(4): 1084–1104.
6.
Bartolomé-GutiérrezRRechea-AlberolaC (2006) Violent youth groups in Spain. Young14(4): 323–342.
7.
BazOFernández-MolinaE (2018) Process-based model in adolescence. Analyzing police legitimacy and juvenile delinquency within a legal socialization framework. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research24(3): 237–252.
8.
BeethamD (1991) The Legitimation of Power. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
9.
BodaZMedve-BálintG (2017) How perceptions and personal contact matter: The individual-level determinants of trust in police in Hungary. Policing and Society27(7): 732–749.
10.
BohnerGDickelN (2011) Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology62: 391–417.
11.
BottomsATankebeJ (2012) Beyond procedural justice: A dialogic approach to legitimacy in criminal justice. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology102(1): 119–253.
12.
BrickBTTaylorTJEsbensenFA (2009) Juvenile attitudes towards the police: The importance of subcultural involvement and community ties. Journal of Criminal Justice37(5): 488–495.
13.
BurfeindJWBartuschDJ (2006) Juvenile Delinquency: An Integrated Approach. London: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
14.
CavanaghCCauffmanE (2015) Viewing law and order: Mothers’ and sons’ justice system legitimacy attitudes and juvenile recidivism. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law21(4): 432–441.
15.
ClowardRAOhlinLE (1960) Delinquency and Opportunity: A Theory of Delinquent Gangs. New York: Free Press.
16.
CohenAK (1955) Delinquent Boys: The Culture of the Gang. New York: Free Press.
17.
CohenJ (1988) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd edn). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
18.
DirikxAVan den BulckJ (2014) Media use and process-based model for police cooperation. An integrative approach towards explaining adolescents’ intentions to cooperate with the police. British Journal of Criminology54(2): 344–365.
19.
EmlerNReicherS (1987) Orientations to institutional authority in adolescence. Journal of Moral Education16(2): 108–116.
20.
EnzmannDKivivuoriJMarshallIHSteketeeMHoughMKilliasM (2018) A Global Perspective on Young People as Offenders and Victims: First Results from the ISRD3 Study. New York: Springer.
21.
FaganJTylerTR (2005) Legal socialization of children and adolescents. Social Justice Research18(3): 217–241.
22.
FarrenDHoughMMurrayKMcVieS (2018) Trust in the police and police legitimacy through the eyes of teenagers. In: RochéSHoughM (eds) Minority Youth, Social Integration and the State. The ISRD-3 Study in Europe and the US. New York: Springer, 167–192.
23.
FerdikFVGistJBlascoN (2016) Perceived police legitimacy: Investigating its association with college-based informal social controls. Psychology, Crime & Law22(3): 252–275.
24.
FerdikFVGistJEvansSZ (2019) Deviant peer associations and perceived police legitimacy. Is there a connection?Criminal Justice Policy Review30(8): 1127–1162. doi: 10.1177/0887403417742949.
25.
FerdikFVWolfeSEBlascoN (2014) Informal social controls, procedural justice, and perceived police legitimacy: Do social bonds influence evaluations of police legitimacy?American Journal of Criminal Justice39(3): 471–492.
26.
FineAWolffKTBaglivioMTPiqueroARFrickPJSteinbergLCauffmanE (2018) Does the effect of justice system attitudes on adolescent crime vary based on psychosocial maturity?Child Development89(6): e468–e479. doi:10.1111/cdev.12983.
27.
GibsonJL (1991) Institutional legitimacy, procedural justice, and compliance with Supreme Court decisions: A question of causality. Law & Society Review25(3): 631–635.
28.
GottfredsonMRHirschiT (1990) A General Theory of Crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
29.
Gouveia-PereiraMValaJPalmoraniARubiniM (2003) School experience, relational justice, and legitimation of institutional authorities. European Journal of Psychology of Education18(3): 309–325.
30.
HaynieDL (2002) Friendship networks and delinquency: The relative nature of peer delinquency. Journal of Quantitative Criminology18(2): 99–134.
31.
HindsL (2007) Building police–youth relationships: The importance of procedural justice. Youth Justice7(3): 195–209.
32.
HindsL (2009) Youth, police legitimacy and informal contact. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology24(1): 10–21.
33.
HirschiT (1969) Causes of Delinquency. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
34.
HoebenEMWeermanFM (2016) Why is involvement in unstructured socializing related to adolescent delinquency?Criminology54(2): 242–281.
35.
JacksonJGauJM (2016) Carving up concepts? Differentiating between trust and legitimacy in public attitudes towards legal authority. In: SchockleyENealTPytlikZillingLBornsteinB (eds) Interdisciplynary Perspectives on Trust: Towards Theoretical and Methodological Integration. New York: Springer, 49–69.
36.
JacksonJBradfordBHoughMMyhillAQuintonPTylerTR (2012) Why do people comply with the law? Legitimacy and the influence of legal institutions. British Journal of Criminology52(6): 1051–1071.
37.
KelmanHCHamiltonVL (1989) Crimes of Obedience. Toward a Social Psychology of Authority and Responsibility. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
38.
KrügerNFormichellaMMLekuonaA (2015) Más allá de los logros cognitivos: La actitud hacia la escuela y sus determinantes en España según PISA 2009 [Beyond cognitive skills: The attitude towards school and its determinants in Spain with PISA 2009]. Revista de Educación367: 10–35.
MarshallIHEnzmannDHoughMKilliasMKivivuoriJSteketeeM (2013) International Self-Report Delinquency Questionnaire 3 (ISRD-3): Background Paper to Explain ISRD2-ISRD3 Changes (Vol. 1). ISRD3 Technical Report Series.
41.
MatsuedaRLKreagerDAHuizingaD (2006) Deterring delinquents: A rational choice model of theft and violence. American Sociological Review71(1): 95–122.
42.
MurphyK (2015) Does procedural justice matter to youth? Comparing adults’ and youths’ views willingness to collaborate with police. Policing and Society25(1): 53–76.
43.
NewburnTReinerR (2012) Policing and the police. In: MorganMReinerR (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 910–952.
44.
PennerEKViljoenJLDouglasKSRoeschR (2014) Procedural justice versus risk factors for offending: Predicting recidivism in youth. Law and Human Behavior38(3): 225–237.
45.
PiagetJInhelderB (1969) The Psychology of the Child. New York: Basic Books.
46.
PiqueroARFaganJMulveyEPSteinbergLOdgersC (2005) Developmental trajectories of legal socialization among serious adolescent offenders. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology96(1): 267–298.
47.
ReisigMDLloydC (2009) Procedural justice, police legitimacy, and helping the police fight crime. Results from a survey of Jamaican adolescents. Police Quarterly12(1): 42–62.
48.
ReisigMDTankebeJMeskoG (2014) Compliance with the law in Slovenia: The role of procedural justice and police legitimacy. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research20(2): 259–276.
49.
RovisDJonkmanHBasicJ (2016) A multilevel analysis of adverse family relations, school bonding and risk behaviours among adolescents. Journal of Child and Family Studies25(2): 647–660.
50.
SampsonRJBartuschDJ (1998) Legal cynicism and (subcultural?) tolerance of deviance: The neighborhood context of racial differences. Law and Society Review32(4): 777–804.
51.
SanchagrinKHeimerKPaikA (2017) Adolescent delinquency, drinking, and smoking. Does the gender of friends matter?Youth & Society49(6): 805–826.
52.
SchuckAM (2013) A life-course perspective on adolescents’ attitudes to police: DARE, delinquency, and residential segregation. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency50(4): 579–607.
53.
StattinHKerrM (2000) Parental monitoring: A reinterpretation. Child Development71(4): 1072–1085.
54.
SteinbergL (2008) A social neuroscience perspective on adolescent risk-taking. Developmental Review28(1): 78–106.
55.
StewartEA (2003) School social bonds, school climate, and school misbehavior: A multilevel analysis. Justice Quarterly20(3): 575–604.
56.
SutherlandE (1947) Principles of Criminology. Philadelphia, PA: J. B. Lippincott.
57.
SweetenG (2012) Scaling criminal offending. Journal of Quantitative Criminology28(3): 533–557.
58.
TappJLLevineFJ (1974) Legal socialization: Strategies for an ethical legality. Stanford Law Review27(1): 1–72.
59.
TrinknerRCohnES (2014) Putting the ‘social’ back in legal socialization: Procedural justice, legitimacy, and cynicism in legal and nonlegal authorities. Law and Human Behavior38(6): 602–617.
60.
TrinknerRTylerTR (2016) Legal socialization: Coercion versus consent in an era of mistrust. Annual Review of Law and Social Science12: 417–439.
61.
TylerTR (1990) Why People Obey the Law. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
62.
TylerTR (2015) Why trust matters with juveniles. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry85(6): S93–S99.
63.
TylerTRJacksonJ (2013) Future challenges in the study of legitimacy and criminal justice. In: TankebeJLieblingA (eds) Legitimacy and Criminal Justice: An International Exploration. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 83–104.
64.
Van DammeAPauwelsLSvenssonR (2015) Why do Swedes cooperate with the police? A SEM analysis of Tyler’s procedural justice model. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research21(1): 15–33.
65.
WarrMStaffordM (1991) The influence of delinquent peers: What they think or what they do?Criminology29(4): 851–866.
66.
WeberM (1964) Economía y sociedad. Esbozo de sociología comprensiva [Economy and Society. An Outline of Interpretative Sociology]. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
67.
WolfeSEMcLeanKPrattTC (2017) I learned it by watching you: Legal socialization and the intergenerational transmission of legitimacy attitudes. British Journal of Criminology57(5): 1123–1143.
68.
WuYLakeRCaoL (2015) Race, social bonds, and juvenile attitudes toward the police. Justice Quarterly32(3): 445–470.
