Objectives

Policing is in the midst of a legitimacy crisis. Procedural justice is a primary avenue for police reform, including when police officers interact with vulnerable populations. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the nuanced circumstances in which the public may endorse police interactions with persons in crisis as more or less procedurally just.

Methods

We recruited a nationally representative sample of 569 Americans and a diverse sample of 809 undergraduates. Using factorial survey vignettes, we assessed bystander perceptions of procedural justice to encounters between officers and a person suffering a behavioral crisis, which varied in officer tactics, use of force, and the cause of crisis.

Results

Officers were perceived as more procedurally just when they employed tactics consistent with Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) training. Use of force reduced perceptions of procedural justice, but use of force by CIT officers was perceived as more procedurally just than conventional officers’ actions, regardless of use of force. Conventional treatment and use of force were considered less procedurally just when the person’s crisis was due to mental illness compared with substance use.

Conclusions

The current findings suggest bystanders did not uniformly endorse use of force by police but were more tolerant of force when officers used CIT-informed tactics and when a person’s crisis was due to substance use. Use of force against persons with mental illness was viewed as procedurally unjust, perhaps reflecting the public’s increasing sensitivity to this population and a growing dissatisfaction with police involvement as the often standard response to persons in crises.

中文翻译：

---

警惕行为危机：旁观者对程序正义的看法的实验测试

目标

警务正处于合法性危机之中。程序正义是警察改革的主要途径，包括当警察与弱势群体互动时。本研究的目的是评估在细微差别的情况下，公众可以或多或少从程序上认可警察与处于危机中的人的互动。

方法

我们招募了569名美国人，组成了具有全国代表性的样本，并从809名大学生中抽取了样本。我们使用析因调查的小插曲，评估了旁观者对程序正义的理解，以了解官员与遭受行为危机的人之间的相遇，这在官员战术，使用武力和危机原因方面各有不同。

结果

仅当他们采用与危机干预小组（CIT）训练一致的战术时，他们才会被视为具有程序上的优势。使用武力减少了人们对程序正义的认识，但是，与常规警官的行动相比，无论使用武力如何，CIT人员使用武力在程序上都比常规人员的行动更为严格。与使用毒品相比，仅在人的精神疾病是由精神疾病引起的危机时，常规治疗和使用武力的程序较少。

结论

当前的调查结果表明，旁观者并没有统一认可警察使用武力，但是当警官们使用CIT的战术时以及当人的危机归因于使用毒品时，他们对武力的容忍度更高。人们认为，对精神病患者使用武力在程序上是不公正的，这也许反映出公众对这一人群的敏感性日益提高，并且对警察参与这一对危机人群的通常标准应对措施的不满与日俱增。