System contact and procedural justice policing
| Date | 01 May 2016 |
| Author | Julie Barkworth,Kristina Murphy |
| Published date | 01 May 2016 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0269758015627044 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
System contact and
procedural justice policing:
Improving quality of life
outcomes for victims of crime
Julie Barkworth and Kristina Murphy
Griffith University, Australia
Abstract
Victims of crime often feel re-victimised when they come into contact with criminal justice pro-
fessionals. Police, as first responders to many victimisation experiences, therefore need to be
particularly sensitive to the way in which they treat victims if they wish to reduce the occurrence of
such secondary victimisation. The present study seeks to explore the role that procedural justice
policing can play in improving the wellbeing and quality of life of crime victims after system contact.
Importantly, it also seeks to put forward a framework for understanding why procedural justice
policing might improve victims’ quality of life; this framework draws heavily on theories of emotion.
The study utilises survey data collected from 171 crime victims to show that procedural justice
policing can indeed reduce the negative impact that system contact can have on a victim’s quality of
life. It will be shown that procedural justice enhances victims’ quality of life because it serves to
diminish the negative emotions experienced by victims of crime when they come into contact with
legal authorities.
Keywords
Procedural justice, policing, crime victims, quality of life, wellbeing, emotion
Introduction
Victims of crime are often relied upon to assist criminal justice agencies with reporting crime and
when prosecuting offenders. Often overlooked by criminal justice officials, however, is the vic-
tim’s sense of wellbeing and quality of life after such encounters with the criminal justice system.
Research has previously reported that many victims of crime feel re-victimised as they proceed
Corresponding author:
Julie Barkworth, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Griffith University, Mt Gravatt, Queensland 4122, Australia.
Email: j.barkworth@griffith.edu.au
International Review of Victimology
2016, Vol. 22(2) 105–122
ªThe Author(s) 2016
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0269758015627044
irv.sagepub.com
through the criminal justice system (for a review see Wemmers, 2013). Research has found many
victims report secondary victimisation from the criminal justice system when authorities hold
victim-blaming attitudes (Campbell, 1998; Campbell et al., 2001; Madigan and Gamble, 1991)
or when there is insensitive or unresponsive treatment from legal officials (Martin and Powell,
1994). Such treatment can lead to numerous detrimental outcomes for the victim, including
anxiety, fear and feeling ostracised from the wider community in which they live. As an authority
that often has first point of contact with crime victims, police need to be particularly mindful of
preventing further victimisation, as it is at this stage that victims of crime can be particularly
vulnerable.
While a large body of research has shown that people’s satisfaction with authorities and the
criminal justice system more broadly increases when auth orities engage in procedural justice
practices (e.g., Hinds and Murphy, 2007; Tyler and Huo, 2002), there is limited research examin-
ing the link between the way police – as front- line responders – treat crime victims a nd the
subsequent effect that such treatment can have on a victim’s quality of life. The present study
specifically seeks to examine the role that procedural justice policing can play in promoting crime
victims’ quality of life after system contact. Importantly, it also seeks to put forward a framework
for understanding why procedural justice policing might improve crime victims’ overall quality of
life; that framework draws heavily on theories of emotion . Survey data collected from crime
victims will be utilised. We will show that when police officers use procedural justice in their
contacts with victims of crime it can: (a) reduce negative emotions associated with system contact;
(b) reduce victims’ subsequent fear of crime; and (c) reduce victims’ feelings of isolation within
their community.
The impact of victimisation
Victims of crime can experience a range of emotions and conditions resulting from their victimi-
sation experience. Studies of crime victims have consistently revealed a number of emotional and
psychological consequences, including post-traumatic stress disorder, major depressive episodes,
anxiety, fear of crime, low self-esteem, complicated or traumatic grief, agoraphobia, obsessive-
compulsive disorder, social phobia, simple phobia and feelings of social exclusion (e.g. Boudreaux
et al., 1998; Garofalo, 1979; Kilpatrick, 1984; Lang et al., 2002; Strang, 2003; Zlotnick et al.,
2006).
Police, as first responders to many victimisation experiences, can further contribute to a vic-
tim’s distress through disrespectful treatment or through what victims often consider as invasive
and insensitive questioning (Maier, 2008). Police are required to gather accurate testimony and as
much evidence as possible when questioning victims. While the solicitation of negative emotion
may not be intentional in these situations, the collection of this information may supersede the
emotional needs of the victim. In order to investigate and later prosecute a case, police require as
much detail as possible, but at what cost to the victim?
Campbell and Raja (1999) interviewed mental health professionals who had worked closely
with rape victims and found most therapists believed contact with criminal justice agents such as
the police and the prosecutor’s office could be harmful to rape survivors’ mental health. This may
be linked, in part, to differences in how authorities believe they should handle a case compared to
what victims expect when dealing with these authorities. Howley (1982, cited in Shapland, 1984)
highlighted these differences, reporting that police believed professionalism and efficiency were of
utmost importance when dealing with victims, while victims expected support, reassurance and
106 International Review of Victimology 22(2)
To continue reading
Request your trial