Legal cynicism is a domain of legal socialization defined by a perception that the legal system and law enforcement agents are "illegitimate, unresponsive, and ill equipped to ensure public safety."[1][2] It is related to police legitimacy, and the two serve as important ways for researchers to study citizens' perceptions of law enforcement.[3]
Definitions
Sampson and Bartusch (1998) defined legal cynicism as ""anomie" about law".[4] Based on Sampson & Bartusch's work, and on that of Leo Srole,[5]Piquero et al. (2005) defined it based on respondents' answers to a five-question survey. In the survey, respondents were asked to rank, on a four-point scale, the extent to which they agreed with each of these statements:
Laws are meant to be broken,
It is okay to do anything you want,
There are no right or wrong ways to make money,
If I have a fight with someone, it is no one else's business, and
A person has to live without thinking about the future.[6]
Causes and correlates
Legal cynicism can be exacerbated when police engage in aggressive misconduct in a community, which can lead to greater violence and less cooperation between the community's citizens and the police.[7] It has been found to be higher in neighborhoods with higher levels of concentrated disadvantage, even after controlling for demographic factors and crime rates.[4] The strongest predictor of legal cynicism is self-reported delinquency.[8]
Effects
Legal cynicism and legitimacy both have significant effects on criminal offending, even after accounting for self-control.[2] Legal cynicism is also associated with lower rates of desistance from intimate partner violence,[9] higher homicide rates,[10] and higher recidivism rates among released prisoners.[11] It has also been found to affect parents' assessments of their adolescent children's violent behavior.[12]
^ abReisig, Michael D.; Scott E. Wolfe; Kristy Holtfreter (2011-12-01). "Legal Cynicism, Legitimacy, and Criminal Offending: The Nonconfounding Effect of Low Self-Control". Criminal Justice and Behavior. 38 (12): 1265–1279. doi:10.1177/0093854811424707. ISSN0093-8548. S2CID145230048.
^ abSampson, Robert J.; Bartusch, Dawn Jeglum (1998). "Legal Cynicism and (Subcultural?) Tolerance of Deviance: The Neighborhood Context of Racial Differences". Law & Society Review. 32 (4): 777–804. doi:10.2307/827739. JSTOR827739. S2CID144846460.
^Srole, Leo (1956). "Social Integration and Certain Corollaries: An Exploratory Study". American Sociological Review. 21 (6): 709–716. doi:10.2307/2088422. JSTOR2088422.
^Emery, Clifton R.; Jolley, Jennifer M.; Wu, Shali (2011-12-01). "Desistance from Intimate Partner Violence: the Role of Legal Cynicism, Collective Efficacy, and Social Disorganization in Chicago Neighborhoods". American Journal of Community Psychology. 48 (3–4): 373–383. doi:10.1007/s10464-010-9362-5. ISSN1573-2770. PMID20963479. S2CID23574976.
^Kirk, David S.; Papachristos, Andrew V. (2011-01-01). "Cultural Mechanisms and the Persistence of Neighborhood Violence". American Journal of Sociology. 116 (4): 1190–1233. doi:10.1086/655754. ISSN0002-9602. PMID21648250. S2CID12686833.