OBJECTIVE We conducted an exploratory study testing procedural justice theory with a novel population. We assessed the extent to which police procedural justice, effectiveness, legitimacy, and perceived risk of sanction predict compliance with the law among people experiencing homelessness. HYPOTHESES We did not develop formal a priori hypotheses but examined five general research questions. First, are there positive associations between police procedural justice, police legitimacy, and compliance? Second, do procedural justice and legitimacy differentially predict compliance, depending on the particular type of offending? Third, are there positive associations between police effectiveness, perceived risk of sanction, and compliance? Fourth, does the perceived risk of sanction differentially predict compliance, depending on the particular type of offending? And fifth, are there positive associations between moral judgments about different offending behaviors and compliance? METHOD Two hundred people (87% male, 49% aged 45-64, 37% White British) experiencing homelessness on the streets of an inner London borough completed a survey that included measures of procedural justice, police legitimacy, perceived risk of sanction, morality, and compliance with the law. RESULTS Procedural justice and police legitimacy were only weakly (and not significantly) associated with any of the three types of compliance (compliance with laws prohibiting low-level crimes, behaviors specific to the street population, and high-level crimes). Police effectiveness positively predicted compliance via perceived risk of sanction, but only for street-population-specific offenses that can be important for survival on the streets, such as begging and sleeping in certain localities. Morality was positively associated with all three types of compliance behaviors. Supplementary analyses suggested a small amount of instability in the results, however, possibly because of the relatively small sample size. CONCLUSIONS The lack of relevant relational connections to legal authority may explain why procedural fairness and perceptions of police legitimacy were not particularly important predictors of compliance in this context. More research is needed into the types of marginalized communities for whom structural factors of alienation and lack of access to resources may serve to reduce normative group connections. Future work should test whether the need to survive on the streets leads people to discount some social and relational constraints to behavior, making people (almost by definition) more instrumental in relation to law and law enforcement. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

关于无家可归者遵守法律的关系和工具观点。

目的 我们进行了一项探索性研究，用新的人群来测试程序正义理论。我们评估了警察的程序公正性、有效性、合法性和制裁的感知风险在多大程度上预测了无家可归者遵守法律的情况。假设我们没有提出正式的先验假设，但研究了五个一般性研究问题。首先，警察程序正义、警察合法性和合规性之间是否存在正相关关系？其次，程序公正性和合法性是否会根据特定的犯罪类型对合规性做出不同的预测？第三，警察效率、感知的制裁风险和合规性之间是否存在正相关关系？第四，根据具体的犯罪类型，感知到的制裁风险是否会不同地预测遵守情况？第五，对不同犯罪行为的道德判断与依从性之间是否存在正相关关系？方法 200 名在伦敦内城区街头无家可归的人（87% 为男性，49% 为 45-64 岁，37% 为英国白人）完成了一项调查，其中包括程序正义、警察合法性、感知制裁风险、道德等方面的措施，并遵守法律。结果 程序正义和警察合法性与三种类型的合规性（遵守禁止低级犯罪、街头人口特定行为和高级犯罪的法律）中的任何一种只有微弱（且不显着）相关。警察的有效性通过感知的制裁风险来积极预测遵守情况，但仅限于针对街头人口的特定犯罪行为，这些犯罪行为对于街头生存很重要，例如在某些地方乞讨和睡觉。道德与所有三种类型的合规行为均呈正相关。然而，补充分析表明结果存在少量不稳定，可能是因为样本量相对较小。结论 与法律权威缺乏相关关系可以解释为什么程序公平性和对警察合法性的看法在这种情况下并不是特别重要的合规性预测因素。需要对边缘化社区的类型进行更多研究，对这些社区来说，疏远和缺乏资源的结构性因素可能会减少规范性群体联系。未来的工作应该测试在街头生存的需要是否会导致人们忽视一些对行为的社会和关系限制，从而使人们（几乎按照定义）在法律和执法方面发挥更大的作用。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2022 APA，保留所有权利）。