community engagement and procedural justice in scotland the scotcet project n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Community engagement and procedural justice in Scotland: the ScotCET project PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Community engagement and procedural justice in Scotland: the ScotCET project

play fullscreen
1 / 14
Download Presentation

Community engagement and procedural justice in Scotland: the ScotCET project - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

aaron
160 Views
Download Presentation

Community engagement and procedural justice in Scotland: the ScotCET project

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Community engagement and procedural justice in Scotland: the ScotCET project Sarah MacQueen and Ben Bradford November 2013

  2. Background to ScotCET • Scottish Government ‘Strategy for Justice’ • Priority: Increasing public confidence in justice institutions and outcomes • Approach: ‘Reassuring the Public’ programme • Little Scottish based evidence to inform development of programme • Funding made available through SIPR to address this evidence gap

  3. Background to ScotCET • Contact with the CJS - one of the strongest influences on trust, confidence and satisfaction • Queensland Community Engagement Trial provides evidence that the quality of interaction between public and police has a direct effect on: • Satisfaction • Perceptions of police fairness • Respect for the police • Trust and confidence in the police • Willingness to comply with police directives • Adhering to principles of procedural justice as key

  4. The ScotCET project • ScotCET aims to test applicability of QCET findings in Scottish context: • Replication of the randomised control trial methodology • Examining high volume routine encounters between public and roads police • Adaptations made in design to account for legal and practical differences

  5. The ScotCET project team • Core team: Sarah MacQueen and Ben Bradford • Collaborating with: Police Scotland (all roads policing units involved) • Supported by Research Advisory Group: academics from UK and Australia; Police Scotland; input from SIPR

  6. Locating ScotCET • ScotCET will run during national Festive Road Safety Campaign 2013/14 • All RPUs involved • Drivers stopped with aim of: • Preventing drink driving • Improving vehicle/ driver safety in winter conditions • Estimated 20,000 stops over campaign period • Pre-post design – half of RPUs assigned to experiment group in post period

  7. The experiment condition • ‘Business as usual’ in Scotland differs from Australia • Encounters in experiment condition will place emphasis on procedural justice: • Ensure verbal communication of all of a series of ‘key messages’ • Include leaflet distribution reinforcing key messages and ‘collective’ nature of campaign • Key messages - Respect, equality, trustworthy motives, dignity, neutrality, citizen participation, openness and explanation

  8. ScotCET – key constructs and measures Procedural justice during the encounter Satisfaction with the encounter General opinions of/trust in/legitimacy of the police in Scotland Adding value

  9. Test constructs against manipulation (e.g. did people in the experimental group experience a more procedurally just encounter) • Test relationships between constructs Key constructs and measures Trust in police Contact PJ ‘Outcomes’ Legitimacy

  10. Key constructs and measures • Contact PJ • Thinking specifically about the Festive Road Safety Encounter, do you think the police were: • Approachable and friendly • Helpful • Respectful • Professional • Fair • Clear in explaining why you had been stopped Trust in police ‘Outcomes’ Contact PJ Legitimacy

  11. Key constructs and measures • Trust in police • On the whole, how confident are you in the ability of the police in Scotland to: • Deal with incidents as they occur • Keep people safe • Act with integrity • Etc. • How often do you think the police in Scotland: • Make fair decisions • Listen to people before making decisions • Treat everyone equally • Etc. Trust in police ‘Outcomes’ Contact PJ Legitimacy

  12. Police legitimacy • Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements • I feel a moral obligation to obey the police • I feel a moral duty to support the decisions of police officers, even when I don’t understand the reasons behind them • The police have the same sense of right and wrong as me • The police stand up for values that are important to people like me • Etc. Key constructs and measures Trust in police ‘Outcomes’ Contact PJ Legitimacy

  13. ‘Outcomes’ • If the situation arose, how likely would you be to • Call the police to report a crime you witnessed • Report dangerous or suspicious activities to the police • Etc. • All things considered, how likely are you in the future to … • Break the speed limit while out driving • Jump a red like if you are in a hurry Key constructs and measures Trust in police ‘Outcomes’ Contact PJ Legitimacy

  14. Procedural justice Legitimacy Adding value What might be the causal mechanism here? What factors might ‘intervene’ in some way? • Group identity • Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements • I see myself as a member of the Scottish community • I see myself as an honest, law abiding citizen • Etc. • Power distance • Still thinking about your relationship with the police: • How much power do you think the police have over people like yourself? • How much power do you think people like you have over the police? Note that we will not be testing these relationships directly in the RCT per se (i.e. we won’t be manipulating power distance directly)