More than any group, adolescents have the highest rate of rule-violating behaviors. This research investigates legal socialization, the process by which individuals develop their understanding of society's rules and make decisions about them. Specifically, the procedural justice legal socialization model predicts that fair treatment by authority figures leads adolescents to view them as more legitimate and, in turn, more likely to obey. Previously, legitimacy has been examined as a composite of trust and an obligation to obey. The current research examines trust and obligation as separate components. Furthermore, although adolescents' perceptions of authority figures' right to make rules has been supported as another important legitimacy factor, it has not been examined in the procedural justice model. This research will examine "right to make rules" as a third legitimacy component. Lastly, this research will incorporate legal (police) as well as non-legal (parents) authority figures.
The research will use a sample of 600 young adolescents currently participating in the New Hampshire Youth Study, a longitudinal study of delinquency. In Study 1, participants will read scenarios in which an authority figure (parent/police) acts fairly or unfairly (procedural justice). Perceptions of trust, right to make rules, and obligation to obey will be assessed. In Study 2, participants will read scenarios with trust, right to make rules, and obligation to obey manipulated (high vs. low). Participants will rate how likely the actor in the scenario and they themselves would be to break the rule.
The findings will be used to develop an expanded model of legal socialization that integrates a new conceptualization of legitimacy. Ultimately, the proposed research will be able to be used immediately via workshops to inform and support school systems and social service agencies working with youth by providing a basis for the development of intervention efforts aimed at reducing adolescent delinquency.
More than any other age group, adolescents are the most likely to engage in rule violating behavior (RVB). Because of this, it is important to understand factors that predict adolescent RVB, such as the influence of authority figures. One model that helps explain the relation between adolescents’ experiences with authority figures and variations in adolescents’ engagement in RVB is the procedural justice model of legal socialization. This model posits that authority figures’ fair treatment (procedural justice) predicts adolescents’ perceptions of authority figures’ legitimacy. In turn, perceptions of legitimacy predict adolescents’ likelihood of engaging in RVB. In previous research, the legitimacy component of this model was conceptualized as a composite of authority figure trust and adolescents’ obligation to obey. Despite significant evidence showing the importance of adolescents’ perception of "authority figures’ right to make rules" as a strong predictor of adolescent RVB, this was not examined in the model as a component of legitimacy. The goal of the current studies was to extend previous research by examining a "three-factor conceptualization of legitimacy" within the procedural justice model of legal socialization with separate authority figure trust and obligation to obey factors as well as an additional component, "authority figures’ right to make rules". The current studies also took a multi-methodological approach and were the first to utilize longitudinal and experimental methodology to examine this new conceptualization of legitimacy within this model. Furthermore, these studies examined legal and non-legal authority figures, including parents, police and teachers. While there has been some examination of both types, the examination of non-legal authority figures within the procedural justice model of legal socialization has been largely ignored with few exceptions. To examine this new three-factor conceptualization of legitimacy within the procedural justice model of legal socialization, three studies were conducted. In the longitudinal study, participants first answered questions about procedural justice experiences with authority figures in their own lives. At the second data collection they answered questions about those authority figures’ right to make rules and trustworthiness as well as their obligation to obey them. In addition, they answered questions about their own RVB. In the experimental studies, participants read a fictitious scenario about an adolescent who wants to break a rule. Then they were asked to answer questions about the actor’s behavioral intention to break the rule as well as their own behavioral intention to break the rule if they were in the same situation. To analyze the data in these studies, a new advanced statistical technique, general structural equation modeling, was used to assess both direct and indirect relations with the outcome, RVB. Overall, the results supported this new three-factor conceptualization of legitimacy; however the patterns of findings varied by authority figure. While the right to make rules emerged as the most important legitimacy-related factor for parents, trust emerged as the most important factor for police and teachers. For parents, fair treatment predicted increased perceptions of their right to make rules. In turn, increased perceptions of parents’ right to make rules predicted decreased adolescent RVB. Similarly, for police and teachers, fair treatment predicted increased perceptions of their trustworthiness. In turn, this increased trust predicted decreased adolescent RVB. Based on the findings from these studies, it is clear that authority figures’ procedurally fair treatment is important in predicting specific components of legitimacy, such as trust, right to make rules or obligation to obey, which, in turn, predict adolescents’ likelihood of engaging in RVB. One implication of these studies is the importance of procedural justice. Regardless of authority figure type, their fair treatment always predicted legitimacy. Another implication of this work is the specificity of legitimacy. Rather than adolescents having perceptions of an authority figure’s overall legitimacy, it appears that legitimacy has distinct components (trust, obligation and right to make rules). Moreover, the influence of procedural justice on each of these legitimacy components, and their ability to predict adolescent RVB, varies across authority figures. For parents, trust was the most important legitimacy-related factor; for police and teachers, it was the right to make rules. Overall, procedural justice is playing an important role in this model for all authority figures by predicting whichever legitimacy-related factor is relevant for a given authority figure. In turn, the relevant legitimacy-related factor then predicts adolescents’ engagement in RVB. Combined, these factors shed better light on this process of adolescent legal socialization and aid in our understanding of adolescent engagement in RVB.
