With the emergence of police legitimacy as a major indicator of good policing, scholars have continued to push our conceptual understanding of this construct. In recent years, a debate has emerged about whether four factors—lawfulness, procedural justice, distributive justice, and effectiveness—are possible sources of legitimacy judgments (Tyler in Annual Review of Psychology 57, 375–400, 2006) or actual components of legitimacy (Tankebe in Criminology 51, 103–135, 2013). My goal in the present paper is review the contours of this debate.

中文翻译：

---

澄清警察合法性衡量辩论的轮廓：对曹和格雷厄姆的回应

随着警察合法性成为良好警务的主要指标，学者们继续推动我们对这一结构的概念性理解。近年来，关于合法性、程序正义、分配正义和有效性这四个因素是否是合法性判断的可能来源（泰勒在《心理学年度评论》57, 375-400, 2006 中）或合法性的实际组成部分出现了争论(Tankebe in Criminology 51, 103–135, 2013)。我在本文中的目标是回顾这场辩论的轮廓。