Institutional procedural justice and street procedural justice in Chinese policing: The mediating role of moral alignment
| DOI | 10.1177/0004865818782572 |
| Date | 01 June 2019 |
| Published date | 01 June 2019 |
| Author | Jianhong Liu,Maarten Van Craen,Yuning Wu,Ivan Y Sun |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
Australian & New Zealand Journal of
Institutional procedural
Criminology
2019, Vol. 52(2) 272–290
!
justice and street
The Author(s) 2018
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
procedural justice in
DOI: 10.1177/0004865818782572
journals.sagepub.com/home/anj
Chinese policing:
The mediating role of
moral alignment
Ivan Y Sun
University of Delaware, USA
Yuning Wu
Wayne State University, USA
Jianhong Liu
University of Macau, China
Maarten Van Craen
KU Leuven (University of Leuven), Belgium
Abstract
Although the process-based model of policing has been widely tested, research on how
procedural justice works within police agencies, particularly its impact on officer willingness
to engage in procedurally fair behavior on the street, is relatively scant. Based on survey data
collected from Chinese police officers, this study assessed the linkages between internal
procedural justice and external procedural justice through the mechanisms of moral align-
ment with both supervisors and citizens and perceived citizen trustworthiness. Greater
internal procedural justice was directly related to higher external procedural justice. Fair
supervision helped build up moral alignment between officers and supervisors and between
officers and citizens, which in turn led to stronger commitment to fair treatment of the
public. Internal procedural justice and moral alignment with citizens also cultivated officers’
Corresponding author:
Ivan Y Sun, Department of Sociology and Criminal Justice, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USA.
Email: isun@udel.edu
Sun et al.
273
perceptions of public trustworthiness, which further strengthened officers’ fair treatment
toward the public.
Keywords
China, Chinese police, external procedural justice, internal procedural justice, moral
alignment, trust in citizens
Date received: 15 January 2018; accepted: 22 May 2018
Introduction
Procedurally fair policing has surfaced as one of the most frequently researched areas in
the literature of public assessments of the police. This vein of investigation has consis-
tently shown that fair and equitable treatment and decision (i.e. procedural justice) by
the U.S. police tend to promote people’s favorable evaluations of police legitimacy, and
subsequently encourage their greater compliance with the law or cooperation with the
police (e.g. Donner, Maskaly, Fridell, & Jennings, 2015; Kochel, Parks, & Mastrofski,
2013; Reisig & Lloyd, 2009; Sunshine & Tyler, 2003; Tyler & Huo, 2002; Wolfe, Nix,
Kaminski, & Rojek, 2016). Although, public perceptions of legitimacy are also predicted
by both perceived fair distribution of police services (i.e. distributive justice) and effec-
tiveness (i.e. the capability of the police to achieve their expected roles and functions),
both distributive justice and police effectiveness are posited to play a less salient role
than procedural justice in shaping police legitimacy (Sunshine & Tyler, 2003; Tyler &
Huo, 2002). Similar results were reported by studies based on data from other major
democracies, such as the U.K. and Australia (e.g. Hinds & Murphy, 2007; Jackson
et al., 2012). In developing and authoritarian countries, procedural justice, albeit still
a significant predictor, was found to play a less important role than police effectiveness
in influencing public views of the police (Sun, Wu, Hu, & Farmer, 2017; Tankebe, 2009).
Building on the literature of organizational procedural justice and a recent theoretical
framework developed by Van Craen (2016a), this primary purpose of this study is to
assess the potential relationship between internal procedural justice (IPJ) and external
procedural justice (EPJ) and the possible mediating mechanisms that connect the two
factors. Specifically, we delineate an explanatory model that links treatments received
from supervisors (i.e. IPJ) to dispositions that officers are willing to render to the public
(i.e. EPJ) through the mediation of officers’ moral alignment with supervisors (MAS)
and moral alignment with and trust in citizens (TIC). Using survey data collected from a
sample of police officers in China, this study aims at testing the validity of these direct
and indirect linkages among these key concepts.
This study expands the existing literature in three ways. First, recent studies showed
that organizational procedural justice is instrumental in promoting officer job satisfac-
tion, reducing job turnover, increasing commitment to and compliance with rules and
policies, and mitigating the impact of high profile negative events on officers (Bradford,
Quinton, Myhill, & Porter, 2014; Haas, Van Craen, Skogan, & Fleitas, 2015; Nix &
Wolfe, 2016; Tankebe, 2010; Wolfe & Nix, 2016). Other studies also identified the
274
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology 52(2)
potential linkage between organizational justice, particularly how officers are treated by
their supervisors, and officers’ support for procedural fairness on the street (Bradford &
Quinton, 2014; Tankebe & Mesko, 2015; Trinkner, Tyler, & Goff, 2016; Van Craen &
Skogan, 2017; Wu, Sun, Chang, & Hsu, 2017). Despite recent evidence, the association
between organizational justice and officer intended behavior and performance remain
under-investigated. The current study is designed to fill this knowledge void in the
existing literature.
Second, we scrutinize the role that officers’ moral alignment with both supervisors
and citizens plays in connecting IPJ and EPJ. Although scholars have called for more
attention to the mediating role of moral alignment in the process-based model of polic-
ing (e.g. how does moral alignment with the police lead to voluntary cooperation with
the police) (Hough, Jackson, & Bradford, 2012; Jackson et al., 2012), the role of moral
alignment in the context of organizational or IPJ has not been empirically tested. In this
study, we simultaneously test to what extent do officers’ MAS, their moral alignment
with citizens (MAC), and their TIC mediate the relationship between internal and exter-
nal procedural fairness.
Finally, we contribute to the existing very limited literature on Chinese police officers
and their organizations. Previous research on procedural justice in policing and police
organizations has been dominated by data collected from major Western democracies
(e.g. the U.S., the U.K., and Australia). We do not know if the findings revealed in these
studies can also be applied to China, a Confucian society that has traditionally empha-
sized the importance of moral values in regulating social relationships yet is currently
suffering a moral crisis due primarily to a lack of political and social freedom and
official abuse of power and corruption (Ci, 2014). The study advances the internation-
alization of criminological knowledge by testing the applicability of a Western-based
theoretical framework in the Chinese context.
Internal and external procedural justice
Past studies on procedural justice relied principally on citizen survey or interview data to
gauge the public’s views of fair and equitable treatment and decision by the police and
their subsequent impacts on perceived police legitimacy and cooperation with the police.
We take a different but relevant approach in evaluating procedural justice by tracing the
antecedents of EPJ on the street back to IPJ embedded in supervisory practices within a
police organization. Such an inside out approach links officers’ views of procedural
justice experienced internally to procedural justice intended for the public externally
(Van Craen, 2016a).
As displayed in Figure 1, we contend that supervisory fair treatment and fair
decision-making cultivate a high level of moral alignment between officers and super-
visors, which signals managerial legitimacy in the eyes of officers. Officers’ feelings
about fair internal procedures and MAS then increase the likelihood of their demon-
strating procedurally just attitudes and behaviors toward people that they interact on
the street either directly or indirectly through moral alignment with supervisors and
citizens and TIC.
Sun et al.
275
Moral Alignment
Citizens
(MAC)
Internal
Procedural Justice
(IPJ)
External
Procedural Justice
(EPJ)
Moral Alignment
Supervisors
(MAS)
Trust in Citizens
(TIC)
Figure 1. Explanatory model of internal procedural justice, moral alignment, and external procedural
justice (the direction of connection is positive for all paths in the model).
Linkages between internal and external procedural justice
Following the work of procedural justice theorists (Sunshine & Tyler, 2003; Tyler,
1990), we regard procedural justice toward citizens as a central pillar of quality and
effective policing. The cultivation and formation of such attitudinal and behavioral
propensities among officers can be achieved chiefly through their managers, especially
first-line supervisors, who have long been identified as the most important reference
group in patrol officers’ work environments (Engel & Worden, 2003; Van Maanen,
1974, 1983). Although past research has indicated that supervisors’ attitudes do not
automatically translate into officers’ attitudes (Engel & Worden, 2003; Ingram, 2013),
managerial influence within police organizations could reach far beyond what scholars
have previously suggested. Indeed, a great deal of research in organizational justice has
found that supervisory styles that stress procedurally fair treatments and fair decision-
making toward subordinates can foster officers’ trust in supervisors and the organiza-
tion, and enhance their compliance with...
To continue reading
Request your trial