Whither Legitimacy? Legal Authority in the Twenty-First Century

Literature Cited

1. Becker GS 1974. Crime and punishment: an economic approach. Essays in the Economics of Crime and Punishment GS Becker, LM Landes 1–54. Cambridge, MA: Natl. Bur. Econ. Res.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Beetham D. 2013. The Legitimation of Power. London: Palgrave. , 2nd ed..
3. Beijersbergen KA. 2015. Does procedural justice during imprisonment matter?. Crim. Justice Behav. 43:63–82
   [Google Scholar]
4. Blader S, Tyler TR. 2003. A four component model of procedural justice: defining the meaning of a “fair” process. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 29:747–58
   [Google Scholar]
5. Chin J, Lin L 2022. Surveillance State: Inside China's Quest to Launch a New Era of Social Control New York: St. Martin's
6. Constantino SM, Sparkman G, Kraft-Todd GT, Bicchieri C, Centona D et al. 2022. Scaling up change: a critical review and practical guide to harnessing social norms for climate action. Psychol. Sci. Public Interest 23:50–97
   [Google Scholar]
7. Deci EL. 1975. Intrinsic Motivation Perspect. Soc. Psychol New York: Plenum Publ.
8. Dieleman JL. 2022. Pandemic preparedness and COVID-19: an exploratory analysis of infection and fatality rates, and contextual factors associated with preparedness in 177 countries from January 1, 2020 to September 30, 2021. Lancet 399:1489–512
   [Google Scholar]
9. Doherty C, Kiley J, Tyson A, Jameson B. 2015. Beyond distrust: how Americans view their government. Pew Research Center Novemb. 23. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2015/11/23/beyond-distrust-how-americans-view-their-government/
   [Google Scholar]
10. Dryzek JS, Bachtiger A, Chambers S, Cohen J, Druckman JN et al. 2019. The crisis of democracy and the science of deliberation. Science 363:1144–46
    [Google Scholar]
11. Dugan A, Newport F. 2013. In U.S., fewer believe “plenty of opportunity” to get ahead. Gallup Poll Oct. 25. https://news.gallup.com/poll/165584/fewer-believe-plenty-opportunity-ahead.aspx
    [Google Scholar]
12. Easton D. 1975. A reassessment of the concept of political support. Br. J. Political Sci. 5:435–57
    [Google Scholar]
13. Elffers H, van der Heijden P, Hezemans M. 2003. Explaining regulatory non-compliance: a survey study of rule transgression for two Dutch instrumental laws, applying the randomized response method. J. Quant. Criminol. 19:409–39
    [Google Scholar]
14. Ellemers N, van der Toorn J, Paunov Y, van Leeuwen T. 2019. The psychology of morality. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 23:332–66
    [Google Scholar]
15. Emery JA. 2009. Procedural fairness in the California courts. Justice Syst. J. 30:118–21
    [Google Scholar]
16. Feldman S, Johnston C. 2014. Understanding the determinants of political ideology. Political Psychol. 35:337–58
    [Google Scholar]
17. Ferguson AG. 2017. The Rise of Big Data Policing: Surveillance, Race, and the Future of Law Enforcement New York: NYU Press
18. Ferrin M, Kriesi H, eds. 2016. How Europeans View and Evaluate Democracy Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
19. Feygina I, Jost JT, Goldsmith RE. 2010. System justification, the denial of global warming, and the possibility of system-sanctioned change. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 36:326–38
    [Google Scholar]
20. Fishkin JS. 2018. Democracy When the People Are Thinking: Revitalizing Our Politics Through Public Deliberation Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
21. Folmer CR, Kuiper M, Olthuis E, Kooistra EB, de Bruji AL et al. 2021. Compliance in the 1.5 meter society: Longitudinal analysis of citizens’ adherence to COVID-19 mitigation measures in a representative sample in the Netherlands. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/dr9q3
22. French JRP Jr., Raven B. 1959. The bases of social power. Studies in Social Power D Cartwright 150–67. Ann Arbor, MI: Inst. Soc. Res.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Frey B. 1997. Not Just for the Money: An Economic Theory of Personal Motivation Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publ.
24. Friedman LM. 1986. The law and society movement. Stanford Law Rev. 38:763–80
    [Google Scholar]
25. Gauchat G. 2012. Politicization of science in the public sphere: a study of public trust in the United States, 1974 to 2010. Am. Sociol. Rev. 77:167–87
    [Google Scholar]
26. Gelfand M. 2018. Rule Makers, Rule Breakers: How Tight and Loose Cultures Wire Our World New York: Scribner
27. Gold M. 1999. The Complete Social Scientist: A Kurt Lewin Reader Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc. Press
    [Google Scholar]
28. Gottfredson DC, Kearley BW, Najaka SS, Rocha CM. 2007. How drug treatment courts work. J. Res. Crime Delinq. 44:3–35
    [Google Scholar]
29. Graham J, Haidt J, Koleva S, Motyl M, Iyer R et al. 2013. Moral foundations theory: the pragmatic validity of moral pluralism. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 47:55–130
    [Google Scholar]
30. Haidt J. 2012. The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion New York: Pantheon
31. Hamm JA, Wolfe SE, Cavanagh C, Lee S. 2022. (Re)organizing legitimacy theory. Legal Criminol. Psychol. 27:129–46
    [Google Scholar]
32. Hetherington MJ, Weiler JD. 2018. Prius or Pickup? How the Answers to Four Simple Questions Explain America's Great Divide Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt
33. Ho LK-K, Fong C-S, Wan TTW. 2021. High level of (passive) compliance in a low-trust society: Hong Kong citizens’ response toward the COVID-19 lockdown. Policing 15:1046–61
    [Google Scholar]
34. Huo YJ, Tyler TR. 2022. Welcoming new members: conflicting reactions to immigration. Contemporary Immigration: Psychological Perspectives to Address Challenges and Inform Solutions FM Moghaddam, MJ Hendricks 83–101. Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Jackson J, Bradford B. 2022. On the nature of acquiescence to police authority. Legal Criminol. Psychol. 27:147–54
    [Google Scholar]
36. Jones JM. 2021. In U.S., Black confidence in police recovers from 2020 low. Gallup July 14. https://news.gallup.com/poll/352304/black-confidence-police-recovers-2020-low.aspx
    [Google Scholar]
37. Kahan D. 1999. The secret ambition of deterrence. Harvard Law Rev. 113:414–500
    [Google Scholar]
38. Käsler D 1988. Max Weber: An Introduction to His Life and Work Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
39. Kelman H, Hamilton VL. 1989. Crimes of Obedience: Toward a Social Psychology of Authority and Responsibility New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
40. Kooistra EB, Folmer CR, Kuiper ME, Olthuis E, Brownlee M et al. 2021. Mitigating COVID-19 in a nationally representative UK sample: Personal abilities and obligation to obey the law shape compliance with mitigation measures Work. Pap., Univ. Amsterdam
41. Kraft-Todd G, Yoeli E, Bhanot S, Rand D. 2015. Promoting cooperation in the field. Sci. Direct 3:96–101
    [Google Scholar]
42. Leventhal GS 1980. What should be done with equity theory? New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships. Social Exchange: Advances in Theory and Research KJ Gergen, MS Greenberg, RH Willis 27–55. New York: Plenum
    [Google Scholar]
43. Levi M. 1988. Of Rule and Revenue Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
44. Lewin K, Lippitt R, White RK. 1939. Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created “social climates. .” J. Soc. Psychol. 10:271–99
    [Google Scholar]
45. McNamee SJ, Miller RK Jr. 2018. The Meritocracy Myth Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. , 4th ed..
46. Mentovich A, Prescott JJ, Rabinovich-Einy O. 2020. Are litigation outcome disparities inevitable? Courts, technology, and the future of impartiality. Ala. Law Rev. 71:4893–979
    [Google Scholar]
47. Milgram S. 1974. Obedience to Authority New York: Harper & Row
48. Morris MW, Hong Y, Chiu C, Liu Z. 2015. Normology: integrating insights about social norms to understand cultural dynamics. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 129:1–13
    [Google Scholar]
49. Morrison R. 1995. Weber's theory of bureaucracy. Marx, Durkheim, Weber: Foundations of Modern Social Thought London: SAGE
    [Google Scholar]
50. Murphy K, Williamson H, Sargeant E, McCarthy M. 2020. Why people comply with COVID-19 social distancing restrictions: self-interest or duty?. Aust. N.Z. J. Criminol. 53:477–96
    [Google Scholar]
51. Natl. Cent. State Courts 2019. State of the State Courts. Williamsburg, VA: Natl. Cent. State Courts
52. Ostrom E. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
53. Pew Res. Cent 2022. Public opinion on abortion: 1995–2022. Fact Sheet, Pew Res. Cent Washington, DC: https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/fact-sheet/public-opinion-on-abortion/
54. Ramos M, Bennett MR, Massey DS, Hewstone M. 2019. Humans adapt to social diversity over time. PNAS 116:2512244–49
    [Google Scholar]
55. Rich M, Dooley B. 2022. Japan's secret to taming the coronavirus: peer pressure. New York Times July 2. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/02/world/asia/japan-covid.html
    [Google Scholar]
56. Robinson P, Darley JM. 1996. Justice, Liability and Blame: Community Views and the Criminal Law Boulder, CO: Westview
57. Rosanvallon P. 2011. Democratic Legitimacy: Impartiality, Reflexivity, Proximity, transl. A Goldhammer Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
58. Schauer F. 2015. The Force of Law Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
59. Schout A, Holderied M. 2018. Public support for European integration Clingendael Rep., The Hague, Neth.
60. Sears DO, Lau RR, Tyler TR, Allen HM Jr 1980. Self-interest and symbolic politics in policy attitudes and presidential voting. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 74:670–84
    [Google Scholar]
61. Sears DO, Tyler TR, Citrin J, Kinder DR. 1978. Political system support and public response to the 1974 energy crisis. Am. J. Political Sci. 22::56–82
    [Google Scholar]
62. Siegel E. 2016. Predictive Analytics: The Power to Predict Who Will Click, Buy, Lie, or Die Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
63. Skitka LJ, Hanson BE, Morgan GS, Wisneski DC. 2021. The psychology of moral conviction. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 72:347–66
    [Google Scholar]
64. Smith TW, Son J. 2012. Trends in public attitudes about confidence in institutions Rep., NORC, Univ. Chicago, Chicago
65. Susskind R. 2019. Online Courts and the Future of Justice Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press
66. Tankebe J. 2013. Viewing things differently: the dimensions of public perceptions of police legitimacy. Criminology 51:103–35
    [Google Scholar]
67. Thibaut J, Walker L. 1975. Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.
68. Tostlebe JJ, Pyrooz DC. 2022. Procedural justice, legal orientations, and gang membership. . Criminology 60:700–39
    [Google Scholar]
69. Trinkner R. 2019. Clarifying the contours of the police legitimacy measurement debate. Asian J. Criminol. 14:309–35
    [Google Scholar]
70. Tyler TR. 2006. 1990. Why People Obey the Law Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
71. Tyler TR. 2016. Understanding the force of law: comments on Schauer. Tulsa Law Rev. 51:507–19
    [Google Scholar]
72. Tyler TR. 2019. Consensual models of governance: legitimacy-based law. Political Legitimacy NOMOS 61:257–92
    [Google Scholar]
73. Tyler TR, Goff P, MacCoun R. 2015. The impact of psychological science on policing in the United States: procedural justice, legitimacy, and effective law enforcement. Psychol. Sci. Public Interest 16:375–109
    [Google Scholar]
74. Tyler TR, Jackson J. 2014. Popular legitimacy and the exercise of legal authority: motivating compliance, cooperation, and engagement. Psychol. Public Policy Law 20:178–95
    [Google Scholar]
75. Tyler TR, Nobo C. 2022. Legitimacy-Based Policing and the Promotion of Community Vitality Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
76. Tyler TR, Trinkner R. 2018. Why Children Follow Rules: Legal Socialization and the Development of Legitimacy Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
77. Ugarizza JE, Caluwaerts D, eds. 2014. Democratic Deliberation in Deeply Divided Societies: From Conflict to Common Ground London: Palgrave Macmillan
78. Van Lange PAM, Balliet D, Parks CD, Van Vugt M. 2014. Social Dilemmas: The Psychology of Human Cooperation Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
79. Van Rooij B, de Bruijn AL, Reinders Folmer CP, Kooistra E et al. 2021. Compliance with COVID-19 mitigation measures in the United States. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/qymu3
80. Verboon P, van Dijke M. 2011. When do severe sanctions enhance compliance? The role of procedural fairness. J. Econ. Psychol. 32:120–30
    [Google Scholar]
81. Weisburd D, Braga A. 2019. Police Innovation: Contrasting Perspectives Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press. , 2nd ed..
82. Weisburd D, Telep CW, Vovak H. 2022. Reforming the police through procedural justice training: a multicity randomized trial at crime hot spots. PNAS 119:14e2118780119
    [Google Scholar]
83. Wright R. 2000. Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny New York: Vintage
84. Yasrebi-De Kom FM, Dirkzwager AJE, Van der Laan PH, Nieuwbeerta P. 2022. The effect of sanction severity and its interaction with procedural justice. Crim. Justice Behav. 49:2200–19
    [Google Scholar]
85. Zimring F. 2011. The City That Became Safe: What New York Teaches About Urban Crime and Its Control New York: Oxford Univ. Press