合法性、信任与法律犬儒主义:概念述评

IF 0.4 4区 社会学 Q4 SOCIOLOGY Tempo Social Pub Date : 2021-10-13 DOI:10.31235/osf.io/7k8ma
T. R. Oliveira, J. Jackson
{"title":"合法性、信任与法律犬儒主义:概念述评","authors":"T. R. Oliveira, J. Jackson","doi":"10.31235/osf.io/7k8ma","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We review the concepts of legitimacy, trust, and legal cynicism in the context the debate about police legitimacy, discuss the extent to which these concepts relate to each other, and offer some early, speculative thoughts on a how relational model of legitimacy can extend beyond procedural justice concerns. Relying upon procedural justice theory, we emphasise the distinction between police legitimacy and legitimation: popular legitimacy is defined as public beliefs that legal authority has the right to rule (people acknowledge the moral appropriateness of legal authority) and the authority to govern (people recognise legal authority as the rightful authority), whereas legitimation is related to the criteria people use to judge the normative appropriateness of legal agents’ exercise of power (e.g., the extent to which police officers are trustworthy to behave in accordance with people’s normative expectations). Building on studies on legal cynicism and legal socialisation, we consider how other aspects of police conduct can send negative relational messages about people’s value within society and undermine their judgements about the legitimacy of legal authority – messages of oppression, marginalisation, and neglect over the life course. We conclude suggesting avenues for future research on public-police relations.","PeriodicalId":45182,"journal":{"name":"Tempo Social","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Legitimacy, trust and legal cynicism: A review of concepts\",\"authors\":\"T. R. Oliveira, J. Jackson\",\"doi\":\"10.31235/osf.io/7k8ma\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We review the concepts of legitimacy, trust, and legal cynicism in the context the debate about police legitimacy, discuss the extent to which these concepts relate to each other, and offer some early, speculative thoughts on a how relational model of legitimacy can extend beyond procedural justice concerns. Relying upon procedural justice theory, we emphasise the distinction between police legitimacy and legitimation: popular legitimacy is defined as public beliefs that legal authority has the right to rule (people acknowledge the moral appropriateness of legal authority) and the authority to govern (people recognise legal authority as the rightful authority), whereas legitimation is related to the criteria people use to judge the normative appropriateness of legal agents’ exercise of power (e.g., the extent to which police officers are trustworthy to behave in accordance with people’s normative expectations). Building on studies on legal cynicism and legal socialisation, we consider how other aspects of police conduct can send negative relational messages about people’s value within society and undermine their judgements about the legitimacy of legal authority – messages of oppression, marginalisation, and neglect over the life course. We conclude suggesting avenues for future research on public-police relations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45182,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Tempo Social\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Tempo Social\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/7k8ma\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tempo Social","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/7k8ma","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

我们在关于警察合法性的辩论中回顾了合法性、信任和法律犬儒主义的概念,讨论了这些概念之间的相互关系,并就合法性的关系模型如何超越程序正义问题提供了一些早期的推测性思考。基于程序正义理论,我们强调了警察合法性和合法性之间的区别:大众合法性被定义为公众相信法律权威有权统治(人们承认法律权威的道德适当性)和统治权威(人们承认合法权威是合法权威),而合法化则与人们用来判断法律代理人行使权力的规范适当性的标准有关(例如,警察在多大程度上值得信赖,能够按照人们的规范期望行事)。在对法律犬儒主义和法律社会化的研究基础上,我们考虑了警察行为的其他方面如何传递关于人们在社会中价值的负面关系信息,并破坏他们对法律权威合法性的判断——压迫、边缘化和忽视生命历程的信息。最后,我们提出了未来研究公共警察关系的途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Legitimacy, trust and legal cynicism: A review of concepts
We review the concepts of legitimacy, trust, and legal cynicism in the context the debate about police legitimacy, discuss the extent to which these concepts relate to each other, and offer some early, speculative thoughts on a how relational model of legitimacy can extend beyond procedural justice concerns. Relying upon procedural justice theory, we emphasise the distinction between police legitimacy and legitimation: popular legitimacy is defined as public beliefs that legal authority has the right to rule (people acknowledge the moral appropriateness of legal authority) and the authority to govern (people recognise legal authority as the rightful authority), whereas legitimation is related to the criteria people use to judge the normative appropriateness of legal agents’ exercise of power (e.g., the extent to which police officers are trustworthy to behave in accordance with people’s normative expectations). Building on studies on legal cynicism and legal socialisation, we consider how other aspects of police conduct can send negative relational messages about people’s value within society and undermine their judgements about the legitimacy of legal authority – messages of oppression, marginalisation, and neglect over the life course. We conclude suggesting avenues for future research on public-police relations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Tempo Social
Tempo Social SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
审稿时长
42 weeks
期刊介绍: Tempo Social to publish original contributions in Sociology; Sociological Theory; Other specific sociologies. Its abbreviated title is Tempo soc., which should be used in bibliographies, footnotes and and bibliographical references and strips.
期刊最新文献
Brasil, China e Índia nas cadeias globais de valor da indústria farmacêutica Confluência dos astros: as condicionantes para a fundação da Associação Francesa de Sociologia Juventude, educação e trabalho no Brasil (2012-2022) Ativismo anti-imigração e extrema-direita na Europa: entrevista com Kristian Berg Harpviken Mulheres políticas: estratégias de legitimidade e recursos mobilizados por Cristina Kirchner
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1