University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Procedural justice and the impact on African Americans: an evaluation study

(USC Thesis Other)

Procedural justice and the impact on African Americans: an evaluation study

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Procedural Justice and the Impact on African Americans: An Evaluation Study
by
Orion Peter Welch

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

August 2022

© Copyright by Orion Peter Welch 2022
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Orion Peter Welch certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Thomas Datro
Anthony Maddox
Patricia Tobey, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2022

iv
Abstract
The history of racism, unjust judicial outcomes, and coercive behavior are persistent policing
features in the African American community. Historically, race has been the main driver for the
disproportionate use of force towards African Americans (Chaney & Robertson, 2013). Research
data suggest disproportionate rates of physical encounters with the police support the perception
that violence is a routine and defining feature of law enforcement agencies across the country
(Statista, 2020). In response to the historical practices of race-based policing, dehumanization,
and unjust criminalization, the relationship between law enforcement officials and the African
American community remains strained with negative perceptions, distrust, and fear (Thomas,
2017).
As law enforcement agencies across the country reflect on police reform, improving police
legitimacy, and reducing forceful outcomes, procedural justice, in part, offers a way forward to
bridge the historical gap between policing and the African American community. While forceful
policing negatively impacts communities in general, this study is focused on the African
American community. Procedural justice is the way police officers interact with the public and
how the characteristics of those interactions shape the public view of the police (Tyler, 2021).
This study examined the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that either
support or hinder police officer’s use of procedural justice principles. Guided by Clark and
Estes’s gap analysis through the lens of critical race theory, this qualitative study examined the
influences on procedural justice implementation as well as other narratives that may impact or
influence departments’ training programs and the use of procedural justice in the African
American community.

v
Keywords: procedural justice, unjust outcomes, principled policing, perceptions,
knowledge, motivation, organizational influences.

vi
Dedication
To the author of us all, thank you for your grace, blessings, and the privilege of life.
To my family, sometimes the greatest journey is the distance between souls. Thank you for your
candlelight.
To the men and women in uniform, thank you for standing the watch, thank you for your
sacrifice, and thank you for your service.
To America, true democracy will not let us fall asleep in the comfort of freedom.

vii
Acknowledgements
To my wonderful committee, Dr. Patricia Tobey, Dr. Anthony Maddox, and Dr. Thomas
Datro. I will forever be grateful for your time and dedication to inspire the next generation of
scholars. Without your guidance and mentorship, this achievement would not be possible.
Dr. Tobey, thank you for the weekly meetings and pushing me to grow outside of my
comfort zone. Just when I thought I considered everything, you always reminded me there was
always more to think about. Dr. Maddox, thank you for inspiring me to look beyond and in
between the stars. I hope to one day be as cool, calm, and collected as you are good sir. Dr.
Datro, thank you for taking this journey with me. Your selflessness and devotion to humanity
inspires me to be a better scholar. Without you, the presentation of this data would not be
possible. I will assuredly pay your kindness forward. I would also like to thank Dr. Marc
Pritchard. Dr. Pritchard, what can I say, in good aviator fashion, you made the impossible look
possible. Thank you for helping me keep the main thing, the main thing.
To my cohort 15 family, I would like to especially thank Andy and Toni. Your love,
guidance, and friendship made my USC journey extraordinary and enjoyable. Andy, thank you
for the constant check-ins throughout the process. There were days when I wanted to pull my
hair out, but you made it all make sense. Toni, thank you for being the consummate battle buddy.
You were a constant source of laughter, and I will always be grateful for your friendship.
Finally, I would like to thank Veronica and Elizabeth from TIVC. Thank you for the
education on equity and what it means to have access to equity. Your insights on how equity
pertains to procedural justice should be a core discussion in policing and in corporate America. I
look forward to many more discussions and I hope to pay your generosity forward.

viii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ...................................................................................................................................... vi
Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... vii
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. xi
List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. xiii
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study .......................................................................................... 1
Context and Background of the Problem ............................................................................ 3
Organizational Goal ............................................................................................................ 4
Description of Stakeholder Groups ..................................................................................... 5
Stakeholder Group for the Study ........................................................................................ 6
Stakeholder Performance Goals .......................................................................................... 7
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions .................................................................. 8
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .................................................... 9
Definition of Terms........................................................................................................... 10
Organization of the Dissertation ....................................................................................... 13
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 14
Procedural Justice ............................................................................................................. 14
Historical Background on Policing African Americans ................................................... 27
Clark and Estes’s Gap Analysis Framework .................................................................... 29
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences .............................. 31
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 48
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 55

ix
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 57
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 57
Overview of Design .......................................................................................................... 58
Research Setting................................................................................................................ 59
The Researcher.................................................................................................................. 60
Data Sources ..................................................................................................................... 63
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 64
Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 65
Data Collection Procedures ............................................................................................... 67
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 68
Validity and Reliability ..................................................................................................... 69
Ethical Implications .......................................................................................................... 70
Limitations and Delimitations ........................................................................................... 72
Chapter Four: Results and Findings .............................................................................................. 73
Survey Methodology ......................................................................................................... 74
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 74
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................ 75
Determination of Assets and Needs .................................................................................. 79
Results for Knowledge Causes ......................................................................................... 79
Results and Findings for Motivational Causes ................................................................. 92
Results and Findings for Organizational Causes ............................................................ 103
Summary of Validated Influences .................................................................................. 115
Chapter Five: Discussion, Recommendations, and Evaluation .................................................. 116

x
Purpose of the Study and Questions ............................................................................... 116
Discussion, Solutions, and Recommendations ............................................................... 117
Summary of Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Recommendations ................. 134
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan ............................................................. 135
Summary of the Implementation and Evaluation ........................................................... 149
Recommendations for Future Research .......................................................................... 150
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 150
References ....................................................................................................................... 153
Appendix A: Survey Alignment ................................................................................................. 183
Appendix B: Survey Protocols.................................................................................................... 193
Appendix C: Qualtrics Information Sheet .................................................................................. 206
Appendix D: Immediate Evaluation Tool ................................................................................... 208
Appendix E: Delayed Evaluation Tool ....................................................................................... 209
Appendix F: Consent Form ......................................................................................................... 211

xi
List of Tables
Table 1 Organizational Mission, Performance Goal, and Stakeholder Goal .................................. 7
Table 2 Knowledge Influences ...................................................................................................... 36
Table 3 Motivation Influences ...................................................................................................... 40
Table 4 Organizational Influences ................................................................................................ 47
Table 5 Data Sources .................................................................................................................... 59
Table 6 Demographic Participants Response ................................................................................ 76
Table 7 Gender .............................................................................................................................. 77
Table 8 Ethnicity ........................................................................................................................... 78
Table 9 Demographics .................................................................................................................. 78
Table 10 Understanding ................................................................................................................ 80
Table 11 Time in Service............................................................................................................... 81
Table 12 Community Relations .................................................................................................... 82
Table 13 Confidence in Training ................................................................................................... 82
Table 14 Application ..................................................................................................................... 86
Table 15 While on duty ................................................................................................................. 87
Table 16 Application of Procedural Justice .................................................................................. 88
Table 17 Time in service ............................................................................................................... 89
Table 18 Opinion ........................................................................................................................... 93
Table 19 Experience ...................................................................................................................... 94
Table 20 Dignity and respect ........................................................................................................ 95
Table 21 Neutrality ....................................................................................................................... 96
Table 22 V oice ............................................................................................................................... 97

xii
Table 23 Trustworthiness .............................................................................................................. 97
Table 24 Future goals .................................................................................................................... 98
Table 25 Value ............................................................................................................................... 99
Table 26 Value ............................................................................................................................. 100
Table 27 Ease of performance ..................................................................................................... 100
Table 28 Experience .................................................................................................................... 104
Table 29 Embracing .................................................................................................................... 105
Table 30 Leadership Support ...................................................................................................... 106
Table 31 Leadership Example ..................................................................................................... 106
Table 32 Commitment to police legitimacy ................................................................................ 107
Table 33 Internal Environment .................................................................................................... 111
Table 34 Organizational Barriers .................................................................................................112
Table 35 Organizational Policy ....................................................................................................112
Table 36 Validated Influences ......................................................................................................115
Table 37 Knowledge Influences and Recommendations .............................................................118
Table 38 Motivation Influences and Recommendations ............................................................. 125
Table 39 Organizational Influences and Recommendations ....................................................... 130
Table 40 Outcomes ..................................................................................................................... 138
Table 41 Evaluation .................................................................................................................... 140
Table 42 Required Drivers .......................................................................................................... 141
Table 43 Evaluation of Components of Learning for the Program ............................................. 146
Table 44 Components to Measure Reactions to the Program ..................................................... 147

xiii
List of Figures
Figure 1 Four Principles of Procedural Justice ............................................................................. 16
Figure 2 Conceptual Framework .................................................................................................. 49
Figure 3 Declarative Knowledge .................................................................................................. 84
Figure 4 Procedural Knowledge ................................................................................................... 91
Figure 5 Motivation Task Value .................................................................................................. 102
Figure 6 Organizational Cultural Models ................................................................................... 109
Figure 7 Organizational Cultural Settings ...................................................................................114
Figure 8 Bloom’s Taxonomy....................................................................................................... 122

1

Chapter One: Introduction to the Study
When addressing modern policing in the United States, racial bias, discourtesy, distrust,
and one-sided engagements are persistent features of policing in the African American
community. Historically, race has played a dominant role in police-involved violence against
People of Color (Edwards et al., 2018). Specifically, researchers and scholars have long reported
the pervasive nature of racial bias (implicit and explicit), discourtesy, and unjustified police
brutality toward African Americans since the 1800s (Allison, 2019; Chaney & Robertson, 2013,
Tolliver et al., 2016).
According to Lett et al. (2020), of the 4,740 civilians who died in law enforcement
custody from June 2015 to May 2020, over 1,265, or about 27%, were African Americans. When
considering population size and demographics, African Americans account for less than 13% of
the U.S. population; however, they continue to experience the use of force at a disproportionate
rate (Tate et al., 2021). Data have supported that law enforcement officers use force more often
with African Americans than with any other racial and ethnic group in the United States
(Graham et al., 2020; Hickman et al., 2008; Krieger et al., 2015; Lyle & Esmail, 2016). Recent
data concerning the disproportionate rates of African American deaths during encounters with
police support the perception that violence is a routine and defining feature of law enforcement
agencies across the country (Statista, 2021; The Washington Post, 2021). The Washington Post
(2021) acknowledged that although fatal encounters with police are rare, there are discrepancies
and disparities in how African Americans are affected by violence as compared to other groups.
In response to the historical practices of police violence and unfair judicial outcomes, the
relationship between law enforcement officials and the African American community continues
to have nearly universal negative perceptions of distrust and dishonest use of authority (Fontaine
2

et al., 2017; Lhamon et al., 2018; Thomas, 2017). Police abuse of authority, starting with
asserting dominance by using demeaning, disrespectful, and harassing treatment, can quickly
escalate into the use of physical violence, tasers, and in some cases, guns (Muzaffar, 2021; Wood
et al., 2020). Scholars suggest that trust, cooperation, and practices of procedural justice could
recover and improve police legitimacy in the African American community (Mentel, 2012).
Procedural justice is the process through which law enforcement officials interact with the public
in a fair and just manner. Procedural justice concerns the quality of the public’s experiences with
law enforcement and their perception of fairness, including applying the law based on respect
and dignity, allowing citizens to voice their concerns, remaining neutral and transparent, and
maintaining trustworthiness throughout the process. These procedures give offenders a voice to
support fair, unbiased, and impartial outcomes (Lind & Tyler, 1988; Mazerolle et al., 2014;
Wood et al., 2020).
Maclean (2012) supported Mentel’s (2012) position by suggesting that African
Americans’ confidence in policing is higher in areas where local law enforcement officers
deliver procedural justice and effective policing than in locations where they do not. A 2016 Pew
Research Center survey supported both Maclean’s and Mentel’s conclusions; the survey results
showed African Americans were less likely than White Americans to give law enforcement
officers high marks for job performance absent procedural justice (DeSilver et al., 2020). The
results also indicated that only a third of Black adults believed the police in their community did
an excellent or good job of using the right amount of force (33%), treating racial and ethnic
groups equally (35%), and holding other officers accountable for misconduct (31%) (DeSilver et
al., 2020). Although law enforcement has historically struggled with gaining the trust and
confidence of African Americans, procedural justice, in conjunction with other social
3

engagement efforts and law enforcement initiatives, may provide a solution. Procedural justice
by itself may not eliminate law enfacements’ interaction with the African American community;
however, it can start to create an environment of social wellness, trust, and police legitimacy
within the African American community
As law enforcement agencies evaluate the application of procedural justice to reduce the
use of force in the African American community, agencies and departments that fail to
implement procedural justice into their daily operations are at risk for increased national
scrutiny, citizen complaints, and civil liabilities, as well as a decline in police legitimacy,
community safety, and community cooperation (Goff & Kahn, 2012; Kenyon, 2019; Tyler et al.,
2015). Most critically, failing to implement procedural justice in daily policing operations will
most likely subject African Americans to continued discourteous service, which could lead to
unnecessary force being utilized. These conditions perpetuate the African American
community’s negative perceptions and leave law enforcement authorities without legitimacy,
ability, and authority to function effectively. It is important to note that procedural justice will
not eliminate all problems concerning the trust and policing in the African American community;
however, it is one of a few instruments that can help build bridges towards collaboration, trust,
and police legitimacy.
Context and Background of the Problem
The Pacific Coast Police Department (PCPD, pseudonym) is a law enforcement agency
located in the western region of the continental United States. The PCPD serves one of the 10
largest cities in the United States and employs over 5,000 sworn officers and 2,000 civilians. The
members of the PCPD serve a population of roughly about 2.9 million people of diverse
ethnicities and races, 80% of whom are documented citizens. The locality covers an area of more
4

than 300 square miles. Recognizing that effective law enforcement is the cornerstone of a free
and safe society, the mission of the PCPD is to safeguard the lives and property of the people by
working in collaborative partnerships with diverse communities to enforce the law, preserve
peace, enhance public safety, reduce the incidence and fear of crime while improving the quality
of life for all its citizens. Although this study focused on PCPD’s use of procedural justice in the
African American community, this focus does not diminish the need for procedural justice in all
communities.
The PCPD was the focus of this study because it has received a significant amount of
national attention for issues regarding race and policing. Selecting the PCPD could provide a
better understanding of the application of procedural justice within this law enforcement
organization and its civilian population. Furthermore, selecting PCPD for this study can help to
better understand what police departments are doing right regarding procedural justice, what they
could do better, what their shared/common procedural justice standards are, and the learning
outcomes of procedural justice successes and failures.
Organizational Goal
The PCPD aims to increase public trust and police legitimacy by using procedural justice
to reduce excessive force, physical altercations, and fatal encounters with African American
community members. Public trust and police legitimacy are measured through police-public
contact (PPCS) and National Crime Victim surveys (NCVS) administered after implementing
procedural justice training in the PCPD annual training cycle for law enforcement officer
proficiency and certification in the spring of 2023. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS)
administers the surveys. By the summer of 2024, 100% of active law enforcement personnel and
civilians should have completed procedural justice and de-escalation training before assuming an
5

active patrol or any front-line assignment. The PCPD will adopt department-wide standard
operating procedures that include knowledge, motivation, and organizational compliance for
bias-free procedural justice policing, de-escalation tactics-techniques-procedures, and peer
briefings/debriefings. Bias-free procedural justice policing supports evaluating an officer’s
ability to make fair and impartial judgments based on dignity and respect, neutrality, and
trustworthiness while giving engaged citizens a voice by actively listening to understand.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
Stakeholders are essential to an organization’s success because they directly impact its
ability to achieve its performance goals (Wheeler & Sillanpaa, 1998). The stakeholder groups
who could directly contribute and benefit from this study are the Pacific Coast African American
community, the PCPD law enforcement officers, and the command staff leadership team. The
African American community is one of the many communities served by the PCPD; however,
just as the Civil Rights Movement was led by African Americans, their interest in this study will
benefit all communities of color. Because the problem of practice is focused on excessive force
and the propensity of physical altercations with African Americans in these communities, they
are a significant stakeholder in this study. The benefits of the project to all Pacific Coast citizens
are safety and quality of life. The specific benefits for the African American communities in
these areas lay in the potential for reducing violent outcomes when interacting with PCPD, racial
profiling, assumptions of guilt, and increasing individuals’ safety and community security.
PCPD Police officers were the central stakeholders in this study. They will benefit from
this study by assessing how knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences impact the use
of procedural justice when engaging with the African American community and every
community in the Pacific Coast study area. The relevant outcomes could manifest as fewer
6

violent outcomes when interacting with African American community members, fewer excessive
use of force complaints, and improved citizen perceptions of police legitimacy, trust, and
cooperation in the African American community.
The PCPD command and staff leaders are a team of internal leaders who create, influence
implement, and enforce law enforcement policies. They directly interface with city managers and
elected officials on policy utility and enforcement. They will benefit from this study by investing
in their police officers, improved department readiness, and cost reduction strategies that include
conceptualizing and operationalizing standard police practices (Holihen et al., 2021). Consistent
with these aims, Heaton (2010) suggests that investments in improving police performance and
community safety are priorities if the outcomes are better quality of life for ordinary citizens.
Stakeholder Group for the Study
Although all stakeholders were essential to study, the PCPD law enforcement officers
were the primary stakeholders. The PCPD law enforcement officers’ knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influence in operationalizing procedural justice for the African American
community is the crux of this study, making the officers essential constituents for addressing the
problem of practice. Specifically, law enforcement officers underwent procedural justice
training, and they are directly responsible for using the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational policies when employing procedural justice on duty. The PCPD could have a
direct impact on decreasing violent outcomes and increasing trust, legitimacy, and cooperation
with the African American community. Failing to achieve the stakeholder goals will further
complicate an already strained relationship with the African American community. The citizens
of the Pacific Coast will continue to see their fiscal resources diverted to cover increased civil
liabilities and awarded settlements for unjust injuries and damages received by African
7

Americans. The failure to implement procedural justice principles could lead to further national
scrutiny of all law enforcement agencies across the United States. Excessive use of force
complaints filed against police departments and associated civil liabilities for violations of
constitutional rights will continue and could increase if procedural justice procedures are not
implemented. Ultimately, failing to achieve the aforementioned goals will decrease public trust,
cooperation, and police legitimacy in the African American community while potentially costing
the American taxpayers millions of dollars in legal liability claims.
Stakeholder Performance Goals
Table 1 presents the PCPD’s and the stakeholder goals that were addressed in this study.

Table 1
Organizational Mission, Performance Goal, and Stakeholder Goal
Organizational mission
To safeguard the lives and property of the people by working in collaborative partnerships
with diverse communities to enforce the law, preserve peace, enhance public safety, reduce
the incidence and fear of crime while improving the quality of life for all its citizens.
Organizational performance goal
By December 2023, 100% of sworn officers will have received extensive training on the
concepts of procedural justice.
Stakeholder goal
Training department: By May 2023, all participating training departments will have created
and implemented a program that focuses on procedural justice principles.

Leadership: By September 2023, 100% of sworn and unsworn command staff will have
received procedural justice training.

Police officers: By July 2024, all sworn officers will demonstrate competence and acceptance
of procedural justice policing, which will be evident by way of a 10% increase in African
American community support of their police officers.

8

Purpose of the Project and Research Questions
The aim of the study was to understand how knowledge, motivation, and organizational
factors influence police officers’ use of procedural justice and understanding of the importance
of perception. Understanding the application of procedural justice as it relates to the African
American community and the perception of unjust policing is important because law
enforcement officers who choose unjustifiable aggression toward African Americans were more
likely to exhibit a record of extensive use of force toward African Americans in custody (Correll
& Ma, 2014). Knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences of procedural justice may
affect law enforcement officers’ attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors when interacting with African
American citizens while on patrol. Until procedural justice becomes the core of all law
enforcement actions, police officers’ bias could continue to lead African Americans to be viewed
as a threat deserving of harsh physical and psychological treatment across the criminal justice
system (Peffley & Hurwitz, 2007). As such, the questions that guided this study were the
following:
1. What are knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences that support or
hinder patrol officers’ use of procedural justice while serving and protecting the
African American community?
2. What recommendations will address the gaps in knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences that negatively impact an officer’s ability to utilize
procedural justice philosophies?
Evaluating the participants’ behavioral outcomes concerning knowledge, motivation, and
organization is critical to understanding how procedural justice can influence enforcement
behaviors through fair and impartial policing in African American communities. Researchers
9

have demonstrated that excessive force used against People of Color continues to be problematic
as police abuse remains a significant challenge in the United States (Lett et al., 2020).
Specifically, African Americans have a higher risk of experiencing physical violence,
psychological harm, or death by law enforcement officers during lawful or unlawful detention
(Chaney & Robertson, 2013). Addressing behavioral outcomes related to modeled behavior,
racial bias, or systemic racism embedded in law enforcement officer’s knowledge, motivation,
and organization experiences can inform and shape prevention strategies, improve community
safety for law enforcement officers and civilians, and prevent fatalities associated with police
intervention (DeGue et al., 2016).
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
This dissertation took a quantitative approach that follows Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap
analysis model for evaluating knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on law
enforcement officers. A quantitative approach was appropriate method because the study’s
primary focus was to determine how participants’ knowledge and motivation shaped the
implementation of procedural justice procedures and how the law enforcement command
organization supported their use of procedural justice while on duty. The two primary questions
were investigated using survey data to understand respondents’ knowledge and motivation and
how these contributed to implementing procedural justice.
The primary problem of practice was evaluated using an analysis of survey responses,
which are core principles of the quantitative method (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Using a
quantitative research approach enabled the findings to be summarized using descriptive statistics
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The descriptive statistics were variability to trends and outliers
related to the research questions (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Creswell and Creswell’s (2018)
10

central tenets for quantitative approaches include open and closed-ended survey questions to
employ statistical procedures, use unbiased approaches, observe and measure information
numerically, and use standards of validity and reliability.
The research was guided using gap analysis inquiry, as described by Clark and Estes
(2008). Clark and Estes (2008) presented a framework that enables organizations to
systematically identify, measure, and assess their progress toward a stated goal. As progression is
determined, identified gaps are analyzed through the stakeholder’s knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences that affect performance gaps (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Definition of Terms
Conflict resolution consists of mediation, problem-solving, and problem management to
address disputes or conflicts characterized as barricade situations, community-based and
interpersonal conflicts, or disputes (Cooper, 1997).
De-escalation is a set of actions that law enforcement officials take during a potential
force encounter to stabilize and reduce the immediacy of the threat. Additional options and
resources can be used to resolve the situation without using force (International Association of
Chiefs of Police, 2017). De-escalation is employed to increase the likelihood of voluntary
compliance and cooperation and can be done through verbal and non-verbal communication
strategies demonstrated through scene management, team tactics, or individual engagement
(Seattle Police Department, 2019).
Excessive use of force refers to frequent use of force, which suggests that law
enforcement officers use it unjustifiably, unfairly, and more than necessary (Adams et al., 1999).
Excessive force by law enforcement officers is permitted for self-defense or defending another
individual or group of people (Premkumar et al., 2022; National Institute of Justice, 2019). There
11

is no universally agreed-upon definition of excessive use of force; however, the International
Association of Chiefs of Police suggests the term use of force is determined by the amount of
effort required to compel compliance by an unwilling subject (International Association of the
Chiefs of Police, 2001).
Explicit bias refers to explicit or conscious attitudes and beliefs that indicate individuals’
overt clarity concerning their prejudices, feelings, and behaviors toward certain groups (Amodio
& Mendoza, 2010; Blair et al., 2001). Explicit bias is overt, openly acknowledged, and conveyed
through negative behaviors expressed as physical aggression, verbal harassment, and through
less direct means, such as exclusion (Amodio & Ratner, 2011; Bobula, 2011; Smith & DeCoster,
2000).
Implicit bias refers to implicit or unconscious attitudes and beliefs that individuals do not
hold in awareness and conscious control. Because implicit bias operates outside of an
individual’s awareness, these attitudes and beliefs can directly contradict individuals’ espoused
beliefs and values (Blair et al., 2001).
Institutional discrimination refers to discrimination practices embedded in the
procedures, policies, and objectives that systematically disadvantage some groups and advance
other groups. Institutional discrimination promotes systemic, discriminatory treatment of persons
based on race, color, and gender (Peirson, 1978).
Police brutality often refers to various human rights violations by law enforcement
officers in which an unwarranted or excessive use of force is used against civilians. Police
brutality is often mistreatment through assault and battery, physical beatings, mayhem, torture,
murder, harassment, false arrest, threats, intimidation, and verbal and psychological abuse (U.S.
Department of Justice, 2020).
12

Police legitimacy is the degree to which ordinary citizens trust and respect law
enforcement authorities. Trust and respect are displayed by confidence in the expectations that
the law is applied fairly. Legitimacy can also be seen through the willingness of citizens to
comply with the directives of law enforcement authorities (Tyler, 2004). Jackson et al. (2012)
suggested police legitimacy is the legal and recognized right to rule; despite that law
enforcement is given that right, legitimacy only exists when the public perceives it.
Procedural justice encapsulates the quality of law enforcement treatment of people and
the quality of the outcomes and decisions associated with public interactions (Reisig et al., 2004.
Procedural Justice can be broken down into four main principles: dignity and respect,
maintaining neutrality, trustworthy motives, and enabling citizens to voice their concerns
(Mazerolle et al., 2014). When law enforcement officers treat the public with dignity and respect,
demonstrate trustworthiness, are neutral in their decision making, and provide people with the
opportunity to participate in the process and express their concerns, then people are more likely
to believe law enforcement officers are procedurally just (Goodman-Delahaunty, 2010; Sunshine
& Tyler, 2003; Tyler, 2008; Tyler & Huo, 2002).
Racial bias in the law enforcement practice is defined as using race as a factor to justify
the application of law enforcement, for example, when conducting stops or determining a
person’s criminal status (Goff & Kahn, 2012; The White House, 2001).
Restorative justice is an approach to justice that aims to make amends between disputed
parties (offenders, victims, others affected by harm, and community members) who participate
collectively in identifying harms, needs, and obligations through accepting responsibilities,
making restitution, and taking measures to prevent recurrence of the behavior (Daly, 2015).
13

Transformative justice is a framework and approach to address and respond to violence,
harm, and abuse. Transformative justice is a way of addressing harm, racism, and oppression
without creating more harm or violence through community-based engagement (Kim, 2021).
Organization of the Dissertation
This study is organized into five chapters. Chapter One introduces the problem of
practice and critical concepts associated with procedural justice and the behavioral outcomes of
policing directed at the African American community. The chapter includes the theoretical
framework and research questions. Chapter Two consists of a review of the relevant literature
concerning the problem of practice and the importance of the study. Chapter Three includes the
details of the methodology, data collection methods, and the associated analysis. Chapter Four
presents the findings. In closing, Chapter Five provides a discussion of the findings, implications
of this study, recommendations for future research, and conclusions.

14

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
This chapter includes an examination of relevant literature discussing law enforcement’s
use of procedural justice and its impact on the African American community. Law enforcement
institutions have a long legacy of using unjust practices, leading to inequalities in law
enforcement and criminal justice (O’Brien et al., 2020). Currently, individual officers continue to
act in discriminatory ways that often reinforce negative perceptions, distrust, and a lack of
legitimacy in the African American community (Lersch & Mieczkowski, 2004; O’Brien et al.,
2020; Worden & McLean, 2017). Wood et al. (2020) and the National Initiative for Building
Community Trust and Justice, a project to improve relationships and increase trust between
communities and law enforcement posited procedural justice as a strategy to transform policing
to benefit and support communities of color, as well as increase police legitimacy and
community trust while reducing police misconduct and the frequency with which officers’ resort
to force in civilian interactions. The National U.S. Department of Justice (2013) supports Wood
et al. and the National Initiative for Building Community Trust and Justice by suggesting that
members of ethnic and racial minority groups perceive police lacking lawfulness and legitimacy.
These individuals base their views mainly on direct interactions with the police, which lead to
distrust. Furthermore, the distrust of the police can lead to more significant consequences as it
undermines police officers’ legitimacy and weakens their ability and authority to serve and
protect.
Procedural Justice
Procedural justice applies fair and just policing that focuses on how police and other legal
authorities interact with the public (Eberhardt, 2020; Robertson & Chaney, 2019; Tyler, 2006;
Worden & McLean, 2017). The process includes dispute-settling procedures centered on an
15

equitable and respectful exchange between the people involved (Tyler et al., 2015). According to
Eberhardt (2020), procedural justice is a type of restorative effort that focuses on building
healthy relationships with the public while improving the quality of each interaction during a
stop. Procedural justice includes policing that emphasizes shared values between law
enforcement officers and community members and encourages collaboration to maintain safe
communities (Bradford et al., 2014; Tyler & Fagan, 2008; Tyler & Jackson, 2014). It is a
concept that promotes positive organizational change and bolsters better police-community
relationships (Hollander-Blumoff & Tyler, 2008). Procedural justice is based on four central
principles of interactions with the public (Figure 1): treating people with dignity and respect,
giving them a voice, remaining neutral and transparent throughout the engagement, and
conveying trustworthy motives (Hollander-Blumoff & Tyler, 2008; Skogan et al., 2015; Tyler et
al., 2015).

16

Figure 1
Four Principles of Procedural Justice

Procedural Justice: Dignity and Respect
The first principle of procedural justice is treating the public with dignity and respect.
Dignity and respect recognize that community members want fair and consistent treatment using
the rules of application, regardless of the situation (Kunard & Moe, 2015). Extending dignity and
respect is especially important when attempting to improve police legitimacy in the African
American community, mainly due to the history of policing in this community and the
significant instances of unjust policing, negative perceptions, and distrust shared by the citizens
(Hayes, 2020; Robertson & Chaney, 2019; Williams, 2015). Voigt et al. (2017) found racial
17

disparities in police officers’ perceptions of respect toward African Americans, specifically that
police officers speak during traffic stops significantly less respectfully to members of that
community than White community members. Treating individuals with dignity and respect
validates them as human beings, and it conveys that all people, regardless of their race, color,
religion, sexual orientation, or ability, deserve fundamental rights and equitable treatment. As
shown through procedural justice, a display of dignity builds continuing relationships and
exchanges through reciprocity (Fehr & Gachter, 2000). Fehr and Gachter (2000) argued that
reciprocity is a social norm of responding to a positive action with a corresponding positive
action.
Conversely, in response to hostile or harmful behaviors, police officers can see
reciprocity through hostility and uncooperative actions (Caliendo et al., 2012; Suranovic, 2001).
Worden and McLean (2017) posited that community satisfaction is shaped by patrol officers
interacting with community members in ways perceived as respectful and affords community
members the ability to maintain their dignity. Other scholars have agreed that community
members often view police interactions positively, regardless of the outcome, as long as they feel
treated in a procedurally just way or perceive the element of respect throughout the exchange
(Donner et al., 2015; Horowitz, 2007; Mazerolle et al., 2013; Nagin & Telep, 2017; Thibaut &
Walker, 1975; Tyler & Yuen, 2002; Wood et al., 2020).
Procedural Justice: Voice and Representation
The second principle of procedural justice involves giving citizens a voice and
representation during police stops. The behavior of the police toward minoritized communities in
general and African American communities specifically, has been a recurrent theme in United
States history as African Americans have faced aggressive policing when voicing concerns
18

during police encounters (Houslohner, 2017). Tyler (2006) suggested that police procedures
focusing on community members providing their viewpoints enables individuals to express their
concerns and participate in the decision-making process during encounters. Worden and McLean
(2017) agreed that people are more satisfied with policing when explaining their situation and
communicating their views.
A compelling factor of procedural fairness includes the social decision-making process,
where fairness concerns the extent of decision-making participation allowed to detained people
of interest (Lind & Tyler, 1988). Warren (2021) argued that safe outcomes depend on African
Americans’ capacity to not ask questions or complain, no matter how unjust or offensive an
officer’s behavior might be. In a 2016 case, Cleveland Police Department patrol officers
confronted Shase Howse, an African American, as he was standing on his front porch. During
the encounter, Howse raised the officers’ suspicions by fumbling for his keys to enter his front
door. In an attempt to verify his legitimacy and proof of residence, officers slammed Howse to
the ground, handcuffed, and jailed him (Chung, 2021). Encounters like these coalesce into
oppressive policing because African Americans often have no voice when stopped, searched, and
arrested by patrol officers (Januta et al., 2020). Worden and McLean (2017) posited that citizens
perceive the police as procedurally just when officers listen to citizens and pay attention to them,
indicating they consider citizens’ views. When patrol officers enlist citizens’ inputs, they allow
citizens to make choices to participate in the decision-making process. Thus, inclusion in verbal
decision-making shows the actions of patrol officers as procedurally just (Worden & McLean,
2017).
19

Procedural Justice: Neutrality and Transparency
Neutrality describes patrol officers’ decisions as unbiased and guided by consistent and
transparent reasoning (Tyler, 2008). Worden and Mclean (2017) and Eberhardt (2020) suggested
that citizens believe decisions are made fairly and impartially when they see evidence that patrol
officers are principled in their decision-making and consistent and transparent in providing fair
and unbiased outcomes. Poor relations between police officers and members of minoritized
groups have the potential to negatively influence the perception of neutrality and transparency,
which can diminish satisfaction and confidence in police authority (Gallagher et al., 2001).
Wetzel (2012) explained the most critical reason for neutrality in the distribution of procedural
justice by suggesting that patrol officers must demonstrate a commitment to public service to all
communities without bias, prejudice, or unfairness.
Worden and McLean (2017) suggested that people want to make sense of what they are
experiencing by tapping into available information. Citizens can infer that patrol officers base
their judgments on facts and not on bias or unfairness when hearing the patrol officers explain
their actions and decisions (Worden & McLean, 2017). An officer might explain why they
stopped a citizen or cited an individual for a specific infraction. By taking these extra steps to
ensure neutrality and transparency, the patrol officer has strengthened the case for procedural
fairness and helped shape the citizens’ perception of police legitimacy toward a positive outcome
(Thibaut & Walker, 1975; Tyler, 1990). If the patrol officer fails to ensure neutrality or explain
themselves, this behavior could negatively shape the citizens’ perception of police legitimacy
(Worden & McLean, 2017). The failure to show neutrality and transparency by not informing
citizens about why decisions are made leads citizens to question the trustworthiness of the patrol
officers’ motives and legitimacy (Worden & McLean, 2017).
20

Procedural Justice: Trustworthiness and Consistency
The fourth principle of procedural justice is trustworthiness and remaining consistent
throughout interactions with citizens. Building trust and maintaining trustworthiness is essential
to effective policing (Rengifo & Fratello, 2015; Goldsmith, 2005; Lea & Young, 1984; Mawby,
1999; Rengifo & Reisig et al., 2004; Rios, 2011), especially in the African American community
where problems related to distrust, including aggressive and prejudicial police behavior, continue
to raise concern over problematic outcomes. The deficit of police trust in the African American
community has been promulgated through violent forms of policing (Goldsmith, 2003; Lea &
Young, 1984; Mawby, 1999), further damaging public trust and the overall perception of police
trustworthiness. In addition, the failure of patrol officers to answer for their acts and be
responsive to the concerns of the African American community has led to disastrous outcomes
with a continued legacy of untrustworthiness.
The mistrust of police is firmly rooted in the negative experiences that inform
individuals’ perceptions and expectations about how they will be treated in the future (Mishler &
Rose, 2001). Hardin (1993) suggested that to understand citizens’ trust in policing, adopting a
commonsense epistemology of trust must occur where the subjectivity of the patrol officer serves
as a central concern. Familiarity, experience, and prior knowledge of patrol officers’ intentions
will create greater levels of trust (Goldsmith, 2005). Jackson and Bradford (2010) asserted that
the benefits of trustworthiness could encourage active citizen participation, make patrol officers
more accountable and responsive, and secure public cooperation and compliance with patrol
officers. Researchers agreed with Jackson’s assertion by suggesting that public trust in police can
enhance the effectiveness and legitimacy of patrol officers’ actions (Lee & Young, 1984; Lyons,
2002; National Research Council, 2004; Sunshine & Tyler, 2003).
21

The George Floyd Case for Procedural Justice
On May 25, 2020, the Minneapolis Police Department (MPD) detained George Floyd, an
African American man, for allegedly passing a counterfeit 20-dollar bill (Associated Press News,
2021; Ives & Cramer, 2021). When handcuffed, George Floyd became compliant while the
arresting patrol officer explained why he was being arrested. When officers tried to put Mr.
Floyd in a patrol car, a struggle ensued as Mr. Floyd complained he was claustrophobic. With the
arrival of a senior patrol officer, a second attempt was made to put Mr. Floyd in the patrol car.
During this time, officers pulled Mr. Floyd from the patrol car as he fell to the ground. The
arresting officer restrained Mr. Floyd while the senior officer placed his knee on Mr. Floyd’s
neck for over nine minutes (Associated Press News, 2021; Ives & Cramer, 2021). Mr. Floyd said
more than 20 times that he could not breathe and began pleading for his life (Hill et al., 2020).
The senior officer’s reply to Mr. Floyd’s pleas was to stop talking and stop yelling (Associated
Press News, 2021; Ives & Cramer, 2021). Six minutes into the ordeal, Mr. Floyd became non-
responsive and eventually succumbed to the senior officer’s knee to his neck (Associated Press
News, 2021).
The aftermath of George Floyd’s death led to a national debate on systemic racism,
unjust policing, and police brutality. Americans of all backgrounds saw the discriminatory
practices and unfair policing African Americans face in the United States. The senior officer was
tried and convicted for the murder of Mr. Floyd (Associated Press News, 2021; Ives & Cramer,
2021). Although the conviction left many African Americans relieved, accountability, just
policing, and the use of procedural justice began to lead the discussions for police reform
(Hassan & Noack, 2021). The use of procedural justice could have prevented Floyd’s death
(Cromar, 2020). Instead, the patrol officers’ failure to use proper protocols and procedural justice
22

deepened the divide between law enforcement and African American communities. Had the
officers used procedural justice, they could have heard Floyd’s voice and used consideration, and
judgment could have been made before forcefully restraining him (Cromar, 2020). The MPD and
the law enforcement community as a whole missed the opportunity to improve the public trust
and police legitimacy. The failure to apply procedural justice, in this case, will require extensive
community healing to overcome mistrust and resentment.
U.S. Army Lieutenant Caron Nazario’s Case for Procedural Justice
On December 5, 2020, Lieutenant (Lt.) Nazario, a Black and Latino Army officer, was
driving with a temporary license plate on the rear window of his car when the Windsor Police
Department signaled him to pull over (Bella, 2021; Ives & Cramer, 2021). Due to the low
lighting in the area where he was initially signaled, Lt. Nazario turned on his car’s hazard lights
and drove at a low speed to a gas station with better lighting and potentially increased safety.
Although Lt. Nazario continued driving for 1 minute and 40 seconds, upon parking at the gas
station, he put his hands outside the window to show the patrol officers he was not a threat
(Bella, 2021). However, the patrol officers immediately drew their weapons on Lt. Nazario and
shouted for him to get out of the car. Lt. Nazario asked why he was pulled over, but the officers
forcefully insisted that he exit the car. Eventually, Lt. Nazario told the attending patrol officer he
was afraid to get out of his vehicle, to which the senior patrol officer threatened him that he
should be (Bella, 2021; & Cramer, 2021). The senior patrol officer continued threatening Lt.
Nazario, but this time with the use of a taser. After several additional requests for officers to
explain why he was detained, Lt. Nazario was pepper-sprayed, removed from his car, forcibly
taken to the ground, and handcuffed. Bodycam footage of the incident shows the senior patrol
officer telling Lt. Nazario he understood why he continued to a safer location and that it was
23

common with People of Color (Ives & Cramer, 2021). The officer eventually released Lt.
Nazario with the condition that he remain silent on the incident, or else he would charge him
with multiple crimes and destroy his military career.
After an investigation, the police department determined that the officers did not follow
policy (Bella, 2021). Although there was heightened sensitivity, in this case, procedural justice
could have prevented the abuse of Lt. Nazario and the firing of the senior patrol officer. The
failure of the patrol officers to use procedural justice damaged police legitimacy on the national
stage and increased the perception that African Americans are disproportionately racialized as
criminals (Horton, 2021). Had the officers started with a procedural justice approach, Lt. Nazario
would have been more likely to have cooperated to address the traffic infraction (Tyler, 2021).
First, the patrol officers could have initiated the initial engagement by explaining to Lt. Nazario
why he was pulled over and continuing so that Lt. Nazario felt respected throughout the process
(PCPD, 2020). Second, they could have given him a voice by allowing him to explain or express
his awareness of the temporary license plate masked by the dark tinted window (PCPD, 2020).
Third, they could have remained neutral before determining his guilt or whether they would cite
him for the infraction (PCPD, 2020).
Moreover, in this case, the officers could have maintained their trustworthiness by
explaining their actions and allowing Lt. Nazario to view the obscured license plate from their
position in the patrol car (PCPD, 2020). Regardless of the outcome, the likelihood of this
exchange increasing trust and improving the perception of police legitimacy through procedural
justice could have positively impacted community relations with the Windsor City Police
Department. Unfortunately, the choice to use unnecessary force on an African American service
member has called into question racialized policing, police training, and the need for widespread
24

police reform. Ultimately, the lack of procedural justice application will cause the city of
Windsor an unspecified amount to reconcile for Lt. Nazario’s civil damages (Foreman, 2021).
How Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Transverse Procedural Justice
Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) transverse all aspects of society. As the deaths of
George Floyd, Breanna Taylor, and Amaud Aubury were televised, many Americans began to
discuss the discriminatory policies and practices directed at African Americans and People of
Color. Throughout the past five years (2017–2022), the lack of equity in policing has been
brought into focus, where much of the discussion centers on discriminatory policies and practices
used in law enforcement encounters with the African American community (Lett et al., 2020;
Ware et al., 2020). A national dialog began, and some White Americans began to speak against
systems and structures of racism that often leave African Americans vulnerable to
discrimination. The diversity of outspoken voices represented many groups and identities,
including race, gender, disability, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, cultural background,
communication style, and thinking (Fuller & Murphy, 2020; Harris, 2019). Fuller and Murphy
(2020) suggested equity is bridging the opportunity gap to ensure fair treatment and fairness for
all. The Ford Foundation (2020) argued that equity is only possible in an environment built on
dignity and respect. Dignity and respect are the intersections where DEI and procedural justice
converge. Inclusion is the idea that people do not have to fit into a culture; they can bring their
different perspectives and opinions to the collective without fear of rejection (Fuller & Murphy,
2020). The Ford Foundation (2020) posited that inclusion is a culture of belonging where active
invitation for participation and contribution is extended to all. The act of contribution and
involvement gives everyone a voice to add value, and this is another convergent point for DEI
and procedural justice.
25

Diversity, equity, and inclusion play a significant role in the administration of justice. In
an empirical assessment of pretextual stops and racial profiling, results showed the Supreme
Court decision in Whren v. the United States (1996) set a precedent and found police officers are
not violating constitutional rights when using pretextual violations to investigate a hunch (Rushin
& Edwards, 2021). This finding permitted police officers to profile minorities based on
stereotyping or an implicit bias (Chin & Vernon, 2014; Maclin, 2019). As a result of this
decision, Rushin and Edwards (2021) found a statistically significant increase in racial profiling
during routine traffic stops. The law allows police officers to investigate based on probable
cause, and police discretion provides subjectivity when deciding to make a traffic stop (Rushin &
Edwards, 2021). Because the premise for a traffic stop may be laced with bias before the first
contact between the police officer and the driver, procedural justice measures are needed to bring
awareness to biases and balance the scale. Traffic violations are not the only situations where
police officers can interject bias before reaching an incident scene. When a police officer
responds to a 911 call, the language and biases of the 911 operator can be interjected into the
police officer’s judgment (Karma, 2020; Takei, 2020). For instance, when the Cleavland police
department responded to the case of Tamir Rice, the 911 operator failed to inform them that the
complainant referenced young Tamir as a child with a toy gun (Gillooly, 2020). These
implications of bias in communications are where equity in law enforcement and procedural
justice should interplay.
The treatment of the citizens should not be governed by preconceived notions,
incomplete information, bias, and prejudicial thoughts and beliefs of the police officers or 911
operators (Lee, 2004; Weitzer & Touch, 2006). Instead, police interactions with all public
members should be grounded in procedural justice and equity to impartially investigate the issue
26

at hand, de-escalate emotionally, heighten situations, and restore the scene to a state where police
officers can reach an equitable solution (Lind & Tyler, 1988; Mazerolle et al., 2014).
An example of how DEI converges with procedural justice is captured by understanding
procedural justice and equity, where procedural justice refers to the fairness in processes and
equity refers to the equal distribution of force as it pertains to the situation. For example, in the
cases of Dylann Roof, James Holmes, Kyle Ritterhouse, Nikola Cruz, and Al Aliwi Al-Issa,
based on the information available (Alang et al., 2017; Britton, 2000), it’s clear that these
suspects received procedural justice during their arrest despite being suspected of mass
shootings. In contrast, in the cases of Eric Garner, Michael Brown, George Floyd, Breonna
Taylor, Philando Castile, Daunte Wright, Lt. Caron Nazario, Randy Cox, and Jaylan Walker,
police footage alludes to a disproportionate amount of force and overuse of resources to address
situations that did not appear to need a coercive level of escalation (13
TH
, 2017). However, as
previously stated, there also seemed to be a lack of procedural justice in how law enforcement
managed these latter cases. The question then becomes, what can be done to create equity when
administering justice to the public?
Procedural justice ensures fairness, starting before a police officer interacts with a suspect
(Maerolle et al., 2014). For example, a police officer may be called to a domestic situation where
the 911 operator primes the officer to be prepared to engage with a large, agitated Black man or
an angry Black woman. The responding police officers should be aware of potential risks;
however, through their training, they should assess the situation rather than act on the
perceptions of a removed third party (Remsberg, 2019). Upon arrival, the police officer should
apply procedural justice by engaging with the intent to investigate and only equitably use force
to ensure the safety of all involved (Owens et al., 2018). In the same way, when a police officer
27

observes traffic violations, if a car is swerving from lane to lane, the officer should be trained to
investigate if the driver is intoxicated or impaired due to a medical emergency before concluding
their final judgement (Owens et al., 2018). The investigation process of all traffic stops requires
the use and implementation of procedural justice and equity before, during, and after the police
officer’s initial engagement (Owens et al., 2018). Equity in this aspect refers to distributing or
applying the right resources after a quick assessment of the situation (Mastrofski, 2012). Equity
in this context also relates to treating the individual with a posture corresponding to the scenario
to stabilize or diffuse the situation to conduct a thorough investigation in a neutral environment
(Mastrofski, 2012). The use of procedural justice in conjunction with an equitable response to the
situation is likely to influence positive outcomes, foster a less adversarial posture between the
officer and the citizen of interest and increase community trust through the proper administration
of procedural justice in communities of color (Donner et al., 2015; White et al., 2018).
Historical Background on Policing African Americans
Contemporary issues surrounding police procedural justice draw from a long history of
institutional practices to dehumanize and control the African American population in the United
States. Law enforcement has played a central role in African Americans’ oppression and social
exploitation through over-patrolling, unjust treatment, and physical abuse (Brucato, 2014; 13
TH
,
2017). Scholars have traced the history of policing and the relationship with African Americans
as far back to slavery, where White townspeople formed slave patrols to keep enslaved African
Americans as property with no human rights (Barlow & Barlow, 1999; Dulaney, 1996; Hadden,
2003; Mailer, 2016; Robinson, 2017). Robertson and Chaney (2019) suggested that the creation
of slave patrols established the precedent for the antithesis of procedural justice (procedural
injustice or procedural dehumanization) and the contemporary escalation of coercive force. Thus,
28

procedural injustice and the escalation of force toward African Americans have created a racial
construct deeply rooted in racism and disrespect.
After the Emancipation Proclamation and the abolition of slavery, the reconstruction
period included the rise of state militias and racial hate groups (e.g., Ku Klux Klan) from the
disbanded slave patrols. These militias and hate groups amalgamated with the newly established
state and local law enforcement departments (Durr, 2015; Porter, 1995; Robinson, 2017). Durr
(2015) suggested that the culture of procedural injustice and escalated violence toward African
Americans links directly to the slave patrols. After the Civil War and the end of slavery, African
Americans continued to suffer procedural dehumanization and escalated violence at the hands of
legitimized law enforcement. Discriminatory laws and racial practices were institutionalized into
the culture for those associated with enforcing the law. Specifically, African Americans
continued to be abused by law enforcement through the discriminatory institutional practices of
the black codes, Jim Crow, vagrancy laws, and many other legal underpinnings aimed at
disenfranchising African Americans. Although these laws were introduced in the southern states,
African Americans in the northern states suffered from institutional racism and police injustice
(Cashmore & McLaughlin, 2013; Hawkins & Thomas, 1991). These practices resulted in African
Americans being brutalized, terrorized, falsely accused, and sentenced to lengthy prison
sentences where they served as a free economic labor source to benefit state profit (Reidy, 1997).
The coercive role that law enforcement has played in the lives of African Americans over
the past two centuries is well documented and well-remembered by many in and out of the
African American community (Alexander, 2012; Jones-Brown, 2007). In considering modern
policing, the national backdrop surrounding controversial police-community relations continues
to face challenges with recent misconduct cases that law enforcement could have avoided by
29

applying procedural justice (Mazerolle et al., 2014). Drawing on Owusu-Bempah (2017), the
intersections of race, class, and criminal justice have produced a dehumanized view of African
Americans that continues to influence their experiences with law enforcement. Scholars have
argued that the intersection of race and the criminal justice systems derives from critical race
theory (CRT) (Garrison, 2011; Golash-Boza, 2016). According to this theory, racist behaviors,
structures, and institutions continue to produce racial inequities through racist laws and practices
(Golash-Boza, 2016). Garrison (2011) suggested that criminality and Blackness became
synonymous over time as incarceration and coercion served as the primary solution to
controlling African Americans in America.
Currently, African Americans are more likely to be victims of racial profiling and
excessive use of force and more likely to report negative police experiences than members of
other racial groups (Barrett et al., 2009; Harris, 1999; Kochel, 2018; Tillyer & Engle, 2013;
Warren & McCarthy, 2014). According to DeSilver et al. (2020), 84% of Black adults and 63%
of White adults believed that Black people are treated less fairly than White Americans in
dealing with law enforcement. Despite these statistics, calls for the American policing system to
end its conflict with communities of color will continue to grow until other approaches are
implemented. Sustainable change toward the application of procedural justice requires law
enforcement, community leaders, the media, and public officials to create a strategic roadmap
through funded mandates and policies to develop trusted relationships, safe communities and
prevent unnecessary loss of life in all communities of color (Van Craen, 2013).
Clark and Estes’s Gap Analysis Framework
Clark and Estes (2008) presented a gap analysis framework through which organizations
can leverage knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO) influences to systematically
30

identify, measure, and assess their progress toward a specified organizational goal. When these
organizational goals are not met, organizational performance gaps are identified through a KMO
lens to determine improvement efforts to close the gaps and improve the organization’s overall
performance (Clark & Estes, 2008). According to Clark and Estes, failure to accomplish
organizational performance goals can be directly attributed to a problem involving an element of
knowledge, motivation, or organization, or a combination thereof. Once a performance gap has
been identified, Rueda (2011) suggested solutions will be more readily available and more likely
to be effective.
Four categories can identify stakeholder knowledge and skills: factual, conceptual,
procedural, and metacognitive (Krathwohl, 2002). These knowledge categories determine
stakeholders’ knowledge and whether they have the information and education needed to
perform tasks or achieve their performance goals. Specifically, during gap analysis,
understanding the who, what, when, where, how, and why can help organizations move toward
achieving their stated goals (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). Stakeholder motivation can be
assessed by six categories: task value, expectancy outcome, self-efficacy, attributions, goal
orientation, goals, and affect (Clark & Estes, 2008; Pintrich, 2003). Pintrich and Schunk (1996)
described motivation as a psychological process that enables individuals to start moving toward
goals, keep moving, and ultimately meet the goal. Motivation influences three aspects of life:
choosing to work toward a goal, persisting to achieve the goal, and how much mental effort is
invested in goal completion (Clark & Estes, 2008). Lastly, organizational influences are
categorized into workplace culture, processes, and resources (Clark & Estes, 2008). To meet
organizational goals, Clark and Estes (2008) suggested that KMO must be in place and aligned to
succeed. A performance solution that will close a performance gap in one area may cause a
31

problem in another area. Therefore, when making changes to knowledge or motivation, the
organization or work processes will need to be modified accordingly (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
Clark and Estes (2008) suggested that organizations can fail to meet performance goals
due to shortcomings in stakeholders’ knowledge, motivation, or organizational execution. To
better understand the gaps created by failing to meet performance goals, organizations must
identify the cause of the gap and examine the KMO influences on the various stakeholder groups
(Clark & Estes, 2008). Knowledge in an organization is defined as the ability to identify and
solve problems while being flexible in a fluid environment (Clark & Estes, 2008). Knowledge
consists of information, training, job aids, and education (Clark & Estes, 2008). Nonaka (1994)
suggested that knowledge is not a steady flow of information. It is, however, fluid and can be
managed to improve performance. Anderson (2009) noted two types of knowledge: declarative
and procedural. Declarative knowledge is knowing what, and procedural knowledge is knowing
how and why (Anderson, 2009). Motivation is manifested through persistence and mental effort
(Mayer, 2011). It is the catalyst that drives the determination to act and meet a goal (Carrera et
al., 2013; Clark & Estes, 2008; Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). If knowledge is the engine that keeps
the car moving, motivation is the gas that enables the engine to function, and organization is the
weather conditions that make the roads easier or more challenging to navigate. Organizational
influences include processes, resources, and culture (Clark & Estes, 2008; Lewis, 2011).
This section will focus on the elements of knowledge, motivation, and organization that
will be used as a framework to guide law enforcement officers in the use of procedural justice
and how its application in the African American community could decrease violent outcomes,
32

civil liability, and increase police legitimacy through positive perceptions and a rise in public
trust.
Knowledge Influences
This section discusses the relevant areas of knowledge and skill that is used in this study.
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) suggested that knowledge is the degree to which learners
know and understand the information being taught. The four types of knowledge are factual,
conceptual, procedural, and metacognition (Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011). The types of
knowledge that were analyzed were declarative and procedural. For this study, the factual
component and the conceptual component were combined and is referred to as declarative
component due to their similarities. The metacognition discussion was removed because it does
not apply to achieving the stakeholder goal of patrol officers’ use of procedural justice.
Therefore, the first component of knowledge for this study is declarative.
When discussing procedural justice, declarative is understanding what procedural justice
is and whether law enforcement officers know how to accomplish procedural justice in the daily
execution of their duties (Clark & Estes, 2008). Declarative knowledge can be achieved through
training, information, job aids, and education (Clark & Estes, 2008). These elements play an
essential part in establishing procedural knowledge as a law enforcement goal because it enables
law enforcement officers’ access to procedural justice knowledge, provides conceptual
information on procedural justice, and serves as a reminder on how to implement procedural
justice through job aides and additional education (Clark & Estes, 2008).
The second component of knowledge for this study is procedural knowledge. Procedural
knowledge is knowing when to use it and how to use it in the daily execution of law enforcement
officers’ duties (Clark & Estes, 2008). For example, driving a car, navigating a learning
33

management system, and filing annual taxes are examples of procedural knowledge.
Understanding the relevant knowledge types related to this problem of practice helped guide this
evaluation study.
Addressing the PCPD implementation and use of procedural justice can shape how law
enforcement officers view and approach their jobs while meeting the goals of their organizations
(Bradford & Quinton, 2014). When officers feel that they are in a procedural justice-like
environment in their organization, they will likely extend the same considerations to citizens they
interact with daily. When law enforcement officers collectively and consistently use procedural
justice in their encounters with African American citizens, these community members perceive
higher levels of policing legitimacy. They comply with law enforcement officers in the absence
of violence or the use of force (Mazerolle et al., 2014). Moreover, procedural justice might
decrease the number of African Americans who experience fatal and non-fatal incidents with law
enforcement officers (Lacoe & Stein, 2018).
Declarative Knowledge
Police reform and modern policing are more critical in the current social conditions than
in the past. Law enforcement officers should know procedural justice principles aided by critical
thinking skills, de-escalation measures, and engagement procedures to increase their legitimate
authority in the African American community. Maintaining effective procedural justice [law
enforcement] training can significantly decrease the likelihood of physical altercation, wrongful
death, and civil liability (U.S. Department of Justice, 2013). Acquiring skills for expertise
frequently begins with learning declarative knowledge about individual procedural steps (Clark
& Estes, 2008). Declarative knowledge is essential because it underscores the skills, measures,
and procedures required to meet goals and is at the core of making complex decisions (Gupta et
34

al., 2009). Factual knowledge and conceptual knowledge influence officers’ level of declarative
knowledge. Declarative knowledge is comprised of knowledge and information police officers
must know to complete a task or solve a problem (Krathwohl, 2009; Schraw et al., 2009).
Launspach (2008) suggested that declarative knowledge is understanding ‘the what and the why’
of circumstances or facts. In procedural justice, officers need to know what procedural justice is
and why it is important. To acquire declarative knowledge, police officers must have structured
access to training or academic instruction, which will enable them to reinforce and revisit their
learning and knowledge of topics (Launspach, 2008).
To implement procedural justice during their daily routines, police officers must rely on
several types of information to use procedural justice (Di Nota & Huhta, 2019). These types of
information include environmental cues, internal physiology, implicit learned tactical skills, and
declarative knowledge of laws, regulations, and procedures (Di Nota & Huhta, 2019). Building
from Di Nota and Huhta (2019), Helsen and Starkes (1999) found in earlier studies that getting
the idea of the action is the first step in developing procedural justice (the skill). Furthermore,
Helsen and Starkes (1999), and Azevedo and Aleven (2013) posited that declarative knowledge
from instruction, observation, metacognition, and problem-solving facilitates learning specific
skills. Declarative knowledge has been demonstrated as essential in other professions, such as
football, baseball, basketball, and soccer (Bueno Américo et al., 2017; Calábria-Lopes et al.,
2019; Chiesi et al., 1979; Hahn & Kellogg, 2018; Sanger et al., 2019). Specific to each sport, the
level of declarative knowledge and trainability for explicit decision-making has been
demonstrated. For example, skill training and decisions such as passing the ball, keeping the ball,
or taking a shot have been examined for sports.
35

Procedural Knowledge
A concept that is parallel to declarative knowledge is procedural knowledge. Police
officers must simultaneously build their procedural knowledge by using declarative knowledge
to accomplish a specific task. Procedural knowledge increases when declarative knowledge
required to perform the skill is available or known (Clark & Estes, 2008). Police officers need to
know how and when to use procedural justice to achieve desired excellence in policing and meet
the legal and social demands of the job. If they use procedural justice with proper procedural
knowledge, they may decrease physical altercations, fatal outcomes, and civil liabilities and
increase community collaboration, public safety, and positive perceptions that lead to police
legitimacy. Procedural knowledge is the know-how of a task (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009;
Krathwohl, 2002; Launspach, 2008). In the framework of procedural justice, procedural
knowledge is knowing how to take the steps needed to follow procedural justice and when it is
needed. An example of procedural knowledge is a police officer’s know-how during a traffic
stop to use procedural justice to influence positive community perceptions and create police
legitimacy. Table 2 presents the knowledge and influence types examined in this study.

36

Table 2
Knowledge Influences
Assumed knowledge influence Knowledge type
Police officers need to know what procedural
justice concepts are and why it is important to
increase police legitimacy.
Declarative (what and why)
Police officers need to possess the knowledge of
how to use procedural justice in their daily
interactions with the public.
Procedural (how)
Police officers need to possess the knowledge of
when to use procedural justice during official
police engagements with the public.
Procedural (when)

To develop mastery, individuals must acquire component skills, practice integrating
them, and know when to apply what they have learned (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). Police
officers also need to know when to use procedural justice based on environmental factors and
circumstances (Table 2). For instance, a police officer conducting a traffic stop on a fleeing
vehicle suspected of an armed robbery and leaving the scene of an accident. The situation
dictates that the investigating officer use an equitable response by taking precautions to detain
the suspects in the vehicle. After the suspects are in custody and are no longer deemed a threat to
themselves, the public, and the investigating officer, procedural justice should be used with the
suspects and the observing community members.
Understanding procedural knowledge and how it increases the likelihood of legitimacy is
the center of gravity for procedural justice (Law Enforcement Best Practices, 2019). Skogan et
al. (2015) and Wood et al. (2019) argued that training and recall of procedural knowledge
increase the propensity for police to use procedural justice strategies in the community. Williams
and Cockcroft (2018) agreed that applying procedural knowledge becomes helpful for how
37

police organizations use procedural justice to enhance police legitimacy with the public.
According to White et al. (2018), police officers who act professionally and demonstrate
procedural knowledge improve citizen satisfaction levels with police encounters. Providing
police officers with knowledge of how to perform procedural justice, when to perform
procedural justice, and why it is essential enables them to use their knowledge and skills to
increase community trust and reduce physical confrontation incidents in the African American
community.
Motivational Influences
This section is focused on the motivation-related influences pertinent to the achievement
of the stakeholder’s goal. In addition to knowledge, motivation is a crucial influence on
performance (Clark & Estes, 2008). Motivation has been described as “the process whereby
goal-directed activity is instigated and sustained” (Schunk et al., 2008, p. 4). According to Mayer
(2011), motivation is an internal state that initiates and maintains focused goal-directed
behaviors. Eccles (2006) posited that several factors might influence the expectance value model,
including a police officer’s self-efficacy and motivation to do a task. Consequently, motivation is
demonstrated by active choice, persistence, and mental effort (Clark & Estes, 2008) and can be
influenced by self-confidence (Eccles, 2006). Pajares (2006) suggested that motivation is
necessary for problem-solving because unless individuals believe they can be effective and
successful, they will be less likely to achieve a goal or complete an action.
Motivation is not only a desire to act but should be apparent by overt actions to pursue a
goal (Mayer, 2011). Motivation is essential for accomplishing the stakeholder’s goals of
implementing a training program that focuses on procedural justice principles by May 2023 to
ensure 100% procedural justice trained command staff personnel by September 2023 and a 10%
38

increase in African American community support through demonstrated procedural justice
competence by July 2024. The stakeholder groups were examined through the lens of task-value
theory, specifically intrinsic value or interest, extrinsic value or utility, and attainment value or
importance.
Task value refers to an individual’s perception of a task’s interest, usefulness,
importance, and benefit (Eccles, 2006; Eccles & Wigfield, 2002). According to Eccles (2006)
and Wigfield and Cambria (2010), task values are the motivators that enable individuals to know
if and why they want to pursue an activity (Clark & Estes, 2008). Eccles (2002) and Pintrich
(2003) suggested these subjective tasks-values fall into four subcategories: intrinsic value (i.e.,
enjoyment or interest), extrinsic value (i.e., utility, usefulness, or relevance), attainment value,
(i.e., the importance for identity or self), and cost value (i.e., benefit or adverse effects).
Intrinsic Value Motivation (Interest)
Intrinsic motivation is the act of doing something without any external rewards (Deci et
al., 1999; Ryan & Deci, 2000). Intrinsic value is defined as “the doing of an activity for its
inherent satisfactions rather than for some separate consequence,” which means that individuals
display intrinsic motivation because the task is enjoyable or exciting, rather than the pressure to
do it or an incentive, reward, or deadline (Ryan & Deci, 2000, p. 56). Researchers suggested
intrinsic value motivation involves the experience of a positive effect while tasks are completed
(Izard, 1977; Pretty & Seligman, 1984; Reeve et al., 1986; Vallerand, 1997). An example in the
policing context of intrinsic value is police officers using procedural justice principles to enjoy
their role as guardians. They seek satisfaction through service, and they have an active interest in
community members’ perceptions.
39

The effectiveness of procedural justice is positively related to a patrol officer’s intrinsic
motivation to serve and protect. Learning and motivation are enhanced when learners have
positive expectations for success (Pajares, 2006). Police officers learning of procedural justice
principles and subsequent motivation is enhanced through self-interest. Researchers have found
that intrinsic motivation has significant effects on procedural justice effects and associated
emotions (Cropanzano et al., 2000; Krehbiel & Cropanzano, 2000; Weiss et al., 1999) potential
relevance to intrinsic motivation. Furthermore, researchers have acknowledged that positive
affect is a principal component of intrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Izard, 1977; Pretty &
Seligman, 1984; Reeve et al., 1986; Vallerand, 1997). Deci and Ryan (1985) were consistent
with these ideas when stating, “emotions are integrally related to intrinsic motivation” (p. 34). As
patrol officers gain comfort with demonstrating procedural justice principles, the positive effect
is likely to strengthen their initial intrinsic motivation levels. Zapata-Phelan et al. (2009)
supported this by suggesting procedural justice is likely to share a mutual exchange with intrinsic
motivation because justice significantly impacts felt emotions. Intrinsic motivation in procedural
justice is an effective way to improve performance (Santos-Longhurst, 2019). Police officers can
motivate themselves and others to use procedural justice principles by focusing on internal
rewards, such as interest, satisfaction, and enjoyment. Table 3 presents the motivational
influences examined in this study.

40

Table 3
Motivation Influences
Assumed motivation influence Motivation type
Police officers need to maintain an interest in
learning procedural justice principles in order
to find enjoyment and satisfaction in
procedural justice application
Task value, intrinsic value
Police officers need to see the value in
procedural justice principles and determine
the knowledge, skill, and understanding of
procedural justice principles are worth
learning
Task value, extrinsic value
Police officers need to believe that procedural
justice principles are critical to their self-
concept as a legitimate authority and see the
value of infusing procedural justice into their
daily duties.
Task value, attainment value

Extrinsic Value Motivation (Utility)
Extrinsic motivation or utility value is the relationship between the task and the
individual’s future goals. Wigfield (1994) suggested that individuals may not enjoy an activity;
however, they may value the last reward or outcome it produces. Wigfield suggested that the
action or task must be integral to the subjects’ future vision or instrumental to pursuing other
goals. In agreement, Eccles (2006) stated that “utility value is determined by how well a task fits
into an individual’s goals and plans or fulfills other basic psychological needs” (p. 391). Police
officers need to experience the value of fully integrating procedural justice principles into their
daily duties (Table 3). Procedural justice principles and application can increase police
legitimacy, community trust, and cooperation and decrease physical altercations, citizens’
complaints, and civil liabilities (President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing, 2015).
41

According to Eccles (2006), when people are aware that performing a task supports attaining
their goals, they will display a higher level of intrinsic motivation (Table 3). An example of
utility motivation is when police officers feel that the knowledge, skills, and understanding of
procedural justice principles are worth learning because there is a practical application and
purpose (Table 3).
Considering the contentious history between the African American community and law
enforcement, procedural justice can leverage utility motivation to be effective with ethnic
minority groups. Specifically, African Americans tend to be less trusting and unlikely to engage
with law enforcement in collaborative crime control than White Americans (Cherney & Chui,
2009; MacCoun, 2005; Skogan, 2006; Tyler & Huo, 2002). Because there are challenges based
on historical outcomes and how the police have treated the African American community,
procedural justice may be an ideal tool to help improve historically fractured relationships
(Bradford, 2014; Sunshine & Tyler, 2003; Tyler, 2001; Tyler et al., 2010). As stated in the
stakeholder’s goal, the task value for police officers is to demonstrate competence and
acceptance of procedural justice policing. The worthwhile practical application and purpose will
be shown by a 10% increase in support from the African American community. Therefore, police
officers’ utility motivation will be high because accomplishing the task will help police officers
attain their goal by increasing police legitimacy, community safety, and community trust.
Attainment Value Motivation (Importance)
Attainment motivation refers to the importance of doing well on a designated task (Clark
& Estes, 2008). This form of motivation derives from people’s image of who they are and want
to be. Attainment value is the importance individuals attach to a specific task related to the
conception of their identity and ideals or competence in a given domain (Wigfield, 1994). An
42

example of attainment value motivation is a police officer who sets goals related to their
occupation, such as learning procedural justice principles to foster a positive perception of
professionalism. It is essential for police officers to learn procedural justice principles through
goal setting because those principles would eventually impact their behavior in the field. In other
words, the more procedural justice is used by police officers in their daily duties, the more their
behavior will garner support from the public (Mazerolle et al., 2014). These outcomes, in turn,
could lead citizens to believe that the police are doing a better job, which can reflect positively
on the officers who use attainment motivation to employ procedural justice (Mazerolle et al.,
2014). According to the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing (2015), “procedural
justice focuses on the ways officers interact with the public and how the characteristics of those
interactions shape the public’s trust of the police” (p. 10). Drawing from Fridell (2013), police
officers should understand the critical components of procedural justice practice as fair and
impartial policing. Police officers who maintain attainment value for demonstrating procedural
justice principles can relate to how they see themselves as law enforcement professionals and
models for others to emulate.
Organizational Influences
In addition to knowledge and motivation, organizational influences determine whether a
stakeholder can perform their roles while achieving their goals. Failure to provide adequate
policies, procedures, and materials can prevent organizations from accomplishing their
performance goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). Clark and Estes (2008) suggested that organizations
have their own culture, including informal barriers, processes, and formal barriers that, when
combined, make gap analysis more complex. Schein (2004) defined culture as “a pattern of
shared basic assumptions that a group learned as it solved its problems of external adaptation and
43

internal integration (p. 17). Clark and Estes’s ideas align with Schein by suggesting that
organizational culture is the core values, goals, beliefs, emotions, and processes that individuals
at the organization learn over time.
Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) posited that organizational culture is better understood
if viewed from two stances: cultural models and cultural settings. Cultural models are the
ingrained assumptions and shared normative understandings of how organizations operate
(Gallimore & Goldberg, 2001; Rueda, 2011; Yildiz, 2014). Cultural settings are visible
manifestations of the underlying cultural models (Rueda, 2011). Cultural settings are the who,
what, when, where, and why of the operationalized reality of a cultural model in a specific
context (Gallimore & Goldberg, 2001; Rueda; 2011; Yildiz, 2014). The following section
focuses on organizational performance using the framework regarding cultural models and
settings for this study.
Organizational Culture Model
The police department is a direct reflection of the community it serves. Regardless of
their ethnic and racial backgrounds, experiences, and personal lives, people most often assimilate
to a new culture after joining the law enforcement community (Crank, 2015). Police culture is
the thread that connects and perpetuates norms, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors of those serving
in the community (Sierra-Arevalo, 2020). The cultural models within policing include the mental
patterns and behaviors of this group’s collective experiences. These patterns and behaviors are
“taken for granted assumptions, can appear invisible, and often go unnoticed” (Cole, 1978;
Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001, p. 48). However, cultural models also encompass views that
members of society widely share, which play a role in understanding how the world works and
the impacts of their behaviors (Abel, 2003; Clark & Estes, 2008; Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001;
44

Holland & Quinn, 1987). Some examples of cultural models are a culture of excellence,
achievement, accountability, fairness, competition, inequity, fear and distrust, and or violence
(Abel, 2003; Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001).
A cultural model of internal procedural justice in law enforcement organizations could
help police officers be better stewards of external procedural justice in their public interactions.
Mazerolle et al. (2014) suggested that police officers can incorporate procedural justice with
offenders, victims, witnesses, the public, and other police officers, particularly junior officers.
Researchers found that perceiving procedural justice within the organization was associated with
greater pay satisfaction, supervisor satisfaction, management satisfaction, and commitment to the
organization (Abel, 2003; Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). In contrast, a lack of procedural
justice has been linked to counterproductive work behaviors (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001,
pp. 296–298). According to Van Craen (2016a), to achieve external procedural justice,
perceptions of internal procedural justice must be met to promote police officers’ practices of
external procedural justice.
Scholars’ interests in procedural justice extend to police officers’ interactions with the
public and how they are treated internally by senior officers and organizational leaders (Paoline,
2004). Furthermore, how often police officers display procedural justice principles depend on
their supervisors’ treatment of them; as supervisors more often depict behaviors associated with
this model, the officers’ behaviors can more often be characterized by procedural justice
principles (Bradford & Quinton, 2014; Colquitt et al., 2001; Haas et al., 2015; Van Craen, 2016a,
b). Thus, as Colquitt et al. (2001) suggested, procedural justice can become reciprocal and self-
reinforcing, even through procedural justice observations. Regardless, officers exposed to these
interactions are more likely to use the principles of procedural justice in the field. To convince
45

police officers of the merits of procedural justice, senior officers and leaders must adopt and
model procedural justice within the organization.
Organizational Cultural Setting
Cultural settings are visible, concrete manifestations of cultural models that appear in a
particular environment and during specific activities (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Examples
of cultural settings are a lack of: institutional goals, performance incentives, training, resources,
and appropriate communications. In addition, cultural settings can include conflicting goals,
restrictive policies and practices, and bureaucratic work misaligned with the organizations’ goals
(Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001).
Law enforcement organizations could benefit from creating a mandatory training
program on procedural justice applications. Researchers have found that the process of an
encounter is more important than the outcome in shaping community members’ perceptions
(Sunshine & Tyler, 2003). Although interactions occur between community members and police
officers, the public often associate the outcomes of these encounters on the law enforcement
community as a whole (Holihen et al., 2021). Law enforcement organizations with procedural
justice as a core value have a better chance of increasing officers’ use of procedural justice and
improving their interactions with the community (Holihen et al., 2021). Tyler and Fagan (2008)
argued that the persistent focus on procedural justice processes and training creates legitimacy
for officers and a foundation for community values. Empirical findings have suggested that
procedural justice training bolsters officers’ behaviors that help promote public compliance and
build trust and legitimacy (Wood et al., 2020). Furthermore, Wood et al. (2020) suggested that
procedural justice training for officers leads to fewer public complaints and decreases harmful
policing practices. The effectiveness of procedural justice training is apparent when officers
46

completing procedural justice training were less likely to resolve incidents with arrests or be
involved with arrests where force was present (Owens et al., 2018).
Although police relationships with the African American community have been
historically problematic, Tyler (2017) suggested that effective procedural justice training can
improve relationships between officers and this community. Robertson and Chaney (2019)
presented three ways procedural justice training and application could render positive relations
between police and African Americans. First, implementing procedural justice training and
holding police accountable may reduce the potential for officer misconduct (Robertson &
Chaney, 2019). Balko (2013) underscored these outcomes by suggesting that procedural justice
raises the public’s expectations when exchanges of mutual respect occur between officers and
the community. As officers practice the procedural justice principle of dignity and respect with
the African American community, respect might be reciprocated, which increases the possibility
of perceived legitimacy and community assistance in solving crimes (Weitzer, 2000). Second,
emphasizing procedural justice in training can change organizations and individuals’ behaviors
(Robertson & Chaney, 2019). For example, the Chicago Police Department’s use of procedural
justice training changed officers’ behaviors, as assessed by a 10% reduction in complaints and a
6.4% reduction in force against civilians (Wood et al., 2020). Third, requiring mandatory
procedural justice training can promote positive reform to lessen the power of the blue wall of
silence and motivate officers to increase their legitimacy in the African American community by
treating these citizens fairly (Balko, 2013; Robertson & Chaney, 2019).
In summary, procedural justice principles can affect a law enforcement agency’s cultural
setting and model. Based on the findings in the literature, law enforcement organizations can
47

expect some impacts when using the training and procedures associated with procedural justice.
Table 4 presents the organizational influences evaluated in this study.

Table 4
Organizational Influences
Assumed organizational influence Organizational category
The PCPD leadership needs to emulate,
encourage, and support internal use of
procedural justice as part of its culture
Cultural model
The PCPD needs to mandate mandatory
procedural training as part of its culture
Cultural setting

48

Conceptual Framework
A conceptual framework defines the main influences, beliefs, assumptions, and variables
regarding a specific phenomenon (Maxwell, 2013). Moreover, the conceptual framework
includes the central concepts in a research study. Researchers use conceptual frameworks to
guide a research design, including the sampling strategy, data collection, research questions, and
data analysis methods (Maxwell, 2013). The content of the conceptual framework is supported
through literature and tailored to a specific problem of practice (Merriam & Tisdell; 2009;
Maxwell, 2013).
The problem of practice for this study concerns using procedural justice practices to
underscore police legitimacy and public trust while decreasing coercive or physical altercations,
citizen complaints, and negative perceptions in the African American community to the
forefront. The actors considered sovereign in law enforcement institutional environments include
“agents who have formal power to influence police departments and policies and informal power
to influence those who do” (Moore, 2002, p. 84). Formal agents include the police commission,
Department of Justice, legal institutions, and other law enforcement organizations (Worden &
Maclean, 2017). Informal agents include appointed officials, interest groups, police unions, and
the media (Worden & Maclean, 2017). The conceptual framework for this study consists of the
primary stakeholder group’s KMO support and other influences from the wider community, the
literature, and theory (Figure 2).

49

Figure 2
Conceptual Framework

Knowledge
Individuals are assessed as effective and achieve higher levels of success when they have
the knowledge and skills to perform their jobs well (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009; Clark & Estes,
2008; Rueda, 2011). To attain high effectiveness and achievement, police officers must possess
subject matter expertise and understand how to meet their organization’s goals (President’s Task
Force on 21st Century Policing, 2015). According to Schraw and McCrudden (2006), instructors
should help learners link new knowledge with prior knowledge to construct sense-making.
Additionally, instructors need to create a training environment that cultivates desirable outcomes
and behaviors for officers (Tuckman, 2009).
50

Motivation
Motivation is an active choice to persist, requiring mental effort (Clark & Estes, 2008).
The active choice is taking on a task or starting a new endeavor. Persistence is the focus to stay
on task as progress is achieved. Mental effort is the allocation of cognitive resources dedicated to
achieving a task or endeavor. In consideration of stakeholder goals, Rueda (2011) suggested that
goal achievement is more related to motivation than competence. Motivation can account for
50% or more of overall performance (Mayer, 2011). By extension, Pajares (2006) noted that if
people believe they can achieve a task, they are more likely to attempt the task than those who
have less self-belief. For PCPD to ensure that training for applying procedural justice principles
is effective, it must identify performance gaps deriving from a lack of understanding of the value
of procedural justice and the relationship to police legitimacy.
Organization
Clark and Estes (2008) maintained that organizations do not realize their goals due to
three organizational gaps: KMO influences. A reciprocal multidirectional relationship exists
among these gaps. These three elements should be balanced and aligned to reach goals and
accomplish tasks. For example, if police officers have superior knowledge and motivation, but
organizational influences misalign with these positive elements, the interactions of these
elements can inhibit achieving performance goals. These organizational influences include
adequate policies, procedures, and materials (Clark & Estes, 2008). In this case, PCPD
organizational cultural models and cultural settings could create barriers to achieving the
stakeholders’ goals.
51

Police Commission Influences
Under the city charter, the board of police commissioners heads the police department.
The board is responsible for the totality of policing, which includes setting policies and the
department’s direction. The police chief manages the department’s day-to-day operations and
implements the board’s policies or policy direction and goals. The board members are appointed
by the mayor and confirmed by the city council (Walker, 2016). The commissioners’ concerns
and directives should reflect the community and align with the goals of city leadership. Board
priorities include implementing recommended reforms, improving service to the public, reducing
crime, and driving, implementing, and supporting community policing programs. In addition, the
police commission is responsible for holding the police force to account, effectively making
them answerable to the communities they serve.
City Leadership Influences
City leadership for PCPD consists of the mayor, city council, city attorney, clerk,
controller, treasurer, and board or commission members of departments. A mayor is responsible
for their city’s governance. The local police department is among other municipal departments
that fall under the purview of a mayor’s authority. Historically, the relationship and influence
between the mayor’s office and the police department have been shaped by social and political
factors deeply rooted in deference toward the police (Walker, 2016). Considering the national
crisis regarding police brutality and the call for police reform, the cultural tradition of deference
to the police explains the reluctance of mayors to criticize police misconduct and seek significant
reform. However, national scrutiny and the power of public opinion have pressed mayors to
influence police leadership to provide oversight and reform. In the current social milieu, the
52

reform must include policies and practices to ensure equitable treatment for all communities
using dignity and respect.
Community Influences
Community influence on police departments’ policies, procedures, and outcomes can be
measured in four categories: legitimacy, perceived effectiveness, cooperation, and compliance
(Peyton et al., 2019). These categories share quadratic reciprocity in that they are all equally and
dynamically influenced by each other. If the community views the police as illegitimate, they
will likely be less effective in achieving goals. If stakeholders view the police as ineffective, law
enforcement is less likely to receive community cooperation and assistance in achieving goals.
Thus, without community cooperation, the chances of the police gaining community compliance
are unlikely. Inability to secure compliance from community members could leave police
legitimacy into question. Researchers have concluded that legitimacy lies in the hearts and minds
of the public (National Research Council, 2004). Depending on the political and economic power
of the community, and if they perceive little value in services rendered, community members
could influence various stakeholders directly and indirectly.
Media Influences
When considering procedural justice and its impact on the African American community,
the media plays a significant role in helping increase police legitimacy and community-based
policing by reducing civilian complaints, physical altercations, and unjust policing. The term
“media” refers to communication technology that disseminates news, education, promotional
messages, and other data (Lister et al., 2008). Drawing from Ellicott (2021), media includes
news media (physical and online print, television, radio, telephone, and billboards), social media
53

(website, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and LinkedIn), and web media (text, videos, photos,
podcast, and blogs).
Media’s impact on the African American community has been unfavorable over the
years; however, the coverage of police brutality has created a movement and a path toward
meaningful reform of policing. While the African American community has always known that
systemic racial bias and discrimination is infused in the criminal justice system, the media is just
now spotlighting this crucial issue. Historically, the media has disproportionately portrayed
African Americans as deviants (e.g., super-predators, drug dealers, rapists, and murders);
(Baynes, 2003; Robertson & Chaney, 2019). Robertson and Chaney (2019) suggested that the
media’s unjust depiction of African Americans unfavorably outpaces the criminality of African
Americans. This institutional racism purported for police falls in line with behaviors outlined by
Delgado and Stefancic’s (2017) definition of CRT.
The media are not only complicit with institutionalized racism, but they also perpetuate
racism as exemplified by the media’s negative portrayal of African Americans with blackface
minstrelsy (Patton, 2008). For example, Loewen (2007) described D. W. Griffith’s 1915 film
“Birth of a Nation” as damaging and advancing the goals of White supremacy. The film
portrayed African Americans as lazy, shiftless barbarians. These types of racist tropes fit well
within the White Supremacist ideology as they continue to marginalize and criminalize the
African American community. Other examples not directly related to law enforcement are
negative media influence and perverse exaggerations of African Americans related to
challenging events such as Hurricane Katrina, the activism created by Colin Kaepernick, and the
Black family involved with the killing of Harambe the gorilla.
54

Many African Americans acknowledge the continued media reports showing the
community in pejorative, disrespectful, and stereotypical ways (Baynes, 2003). For example, the
media often describe African Americans, who are victims of excessive force by police, in
derogatory terms (thugs, super predators, suspicious, up to no good), assuming that social
deviance and disapproving backgrounds are somehow related to the case (Robertson & Chaney,
2019). Consider the negative portrayals of Philando Castile, Michael Brown, Akai Gurley, Rekia
Boyd, Terrence Crutcher, Walter Scott, and many others after police subjected them to brutality.
These media depictions prime members of society to believe that African Americans are prone to
criminality. These beliefs are relevant to implementing procedural justice (Gilroy, 2008; Owusu-
Bempah, 2017) because they depict African Americans as unworthy of justice and consequently,
black lives are less valued due to racial bias perpetuated by the media (Robertson & Chaney,
2019).
The media influence city leadership regarding police reform and procedural justice
practices. The media plays a central role in public administration and policymaking (Klijn et al.,
2016). Giacomini and Simonetto (2016) noted that information technology and social media
have heavily influenced the effectiveness of public policies. Because of the reach and influence
of social media on city residents, city leaders are eager to enlist positive partnerships with media
outlets to shape their political agenda and public perception (Bryson et al., 2012; Jann &
Wegrich, 2017). In the current environment, city leaders must seek media involvement or risk
losing public trust in their accountability, transparency, and communication (Giacomini &
Simonetto, 2020). When collaborating with the media on policy and management issues, city
leaders should act strategically to communicate intent or risk the possibility of being pitted
against other community stakeholders.
55

Notwithstanding, the media also impact the police commission and the police
departments under their leadership. A major frustration for the police commission and the law
enforcement officials is the trial by media that ensues after incidents involving officers and
African American citizens. These media events often provide hostile and antagonistic
representations of officers (Grimlich & Parker, 2017). Thus, some police officers have
contentious perceptions of the media. In addition, Grimlich and Parker (2017) reported that
officers who have a negative view of relationships with the media are also more likely to
perceive a disconnect between themselves and the public.
Trial by media is a “dynamic, impact-driven, media-led process by which individuals,
who may or may not be known, are tried and sentenced in the court of public opinion” (Greer &
McLaughlin, 2011, p. 7). Scholars have argued that trial by media leads to pre-judgment,
overstating of facts, and moral panic (Cohen, 2002; Garland, 2008; Young, 2009). In these cases,
objectivity, due process, and judicial scrutiny of hard evidence can give way under the media
spotlight to real-time sensationalism, speculation, and condemnation of the accused (Greer &
McLaughlin, 2011). This media ecosystem leaves the voice of law enforcement leaders
competing to be heard over many others vying to assert their versions of reality on justice and
policing issues (Greer & McLaughlin, 2011). Given the advancement of media technology and
the public’s appetite for immediate information, police leaders are relegated to negotiating facts
and building agendas (Trottier, 2015).
Conclusion
In review, the purpose of this study was to understand how knowledge, motivation, and
organizational factors influence police officers’ use of procedural justice and understanding of
the importance of perception. The analysis of the literature focuses on KMO and the stakeholder
56

goal of demonstrating competence and acceptance of procedural justice training by July 2024.
Achievement of the goals will be evidenced by a 10% increase in African American support of
their police officers. Additional stakeholder goals require an active training program that focuses
on procedural justice principles by May 2023 and training 100% of PCPD command staff on
procedural justice principles by September 2023. Police officers were the primary stakeholders
in this study. The literature review highlights contextual elements associated with police officers’
KMO influences and provides historical context that underscores the trust and relationship
between police officers and the African American community. The conceptual framework
presented illustrates how officers’ KMO are influenced by each other and how other internal and
external influences affect officers’ use of procedural justice principles. Chapter Three will
provide a deeper discussion of the design and methodology for this study.

57

Chapter Three: Methodology
The aim of this study was to explore how KMO factors influence police officers’ use of
procedural justice while serving in the African American community. The PCPD will develop a
strategic plan for three stakeholder goals. First, the PCPD training division will create and
implement a mandatory program focused on procedural justice principles by May 2023. Second,
100% of PCPD command staff will have received procedural justice training by September 2023.
Third, by July 2024, 100% of PCPD police officers will demonstrate competence and acceptance
of procedural justice policing, which will be evidenced by a 10% increase in African American
community support. The KMO influences on procedural justice determine attitudes, beliefs, and
behavioral outcomes of police officers when interacting with each other and with members of the
African American community. This chapter describes the methodology guiding the research to
answer the research questions listed below. Additionally, it discusses data collection,
instrumentation, and analysis. It concludes with the ethical considerations associated with this
research as well as limitations and delimitations.
Research Questions
The research purpose and problem statement align with the research questions (Creswell
& Creswell, 2018). Two research questions guided this study:
1. What are officer’s knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences that
support or hinder patrol officer’s use of procedural justice while serving and
protecting the African American community?
2. What recommendations will address the gaps in knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences that negatively impact an officer’s ability to utilize
procedural justice philosophies?
58

These questions aim to support organizational performance by providing an understanding of the
factors limiting procedural justice implementation, thereby increasing police legitimacy and
decreasing physical altercations and use of force outcomes with African Americans.
Overview of Design
This study used a survey consisting of close-ended and open-ended questions to collect
amplifying participant context (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The design aligns with the research
questions to discover factors affecting the participants’ KMO influences on the implementation
of procedural justice. Public leaders, community members, and police officers understand the
factors that adversely affect police legitimacy and the spirit of cooperation between policing and
the African American community. This study aimed to identify key issues that prevent officers
from achieving police legitimacy and reducing forceful outcomes through procedural justice.
Qualitative data collected from the survey through open-ended free-text survey questions and
internal organizational document review provided context to the quantitative findings. The
survey alignment can be found in Appendix A. Table 5 illustrates quantitative and qualitative
sources used to answer the research questions.
Data were collected with the collaboration of the PCPD. Through the PCPD point of
contact, an invitation was sent to all officers willing to take the survey. Although a census
sample is an ideal approach to ensuring maximum participation, validating 100% of this large
group for the PCPD is outside the scale of this study. Therefore, purposeful sampling narrowed
the scope of procedural justice implementation and use. The specific demographic utilized for
this study were officers and departments assigned to patrol in African American communities.

59

Table 5
Data Sources
Research questions Method 1:
survey
Method 2:
Open-ended
survey question
Method 3:
Document analysis
What are the officer’s knowledge,
motivational, and
organizational influences that
support or hinder patrol
officer’s use of procedural
justice while serving and
protecting the African
American community?
X X X
What recommendations will
address the gaps in knowledge,
motivation, and organizational
influences that negatively
impact an officer’s ability to
utilize procedural justice
philosophies?
X X X

Research Setting
The research setting in this descriptive case study was a single police department. The
location is on the west coast of the United States. The PCPD serves one of the country’s 10
largest cities. Consisting of over 9,000 sworn officers and 3,000 civilians, the PCPD serves a
population of roughly about 3.9 million people of diverse ethnicities and races, 80% of whom are
U.S. citizens, in more than 450 square miles. Only departments and officers detailed to protect
and serve African American communities were included in this study. Although procedural
justice benefits all communities, this study focused on the disproportionate use of force and
historical atrocities in the African American community.
60

The PCPD was chosen because it was spotlighted in the national media for issues
surrounding race and policing in this country. Further, the PCPD was asked to participate given
the size and diversity of the metropolitan area it serves. These events created a moment of pause
for all Americans to reconsider and reimagine the impact of institutional discrimination and
violent police practices in the African American community. In response to persistent inequitable
and violent outcomes, law enforcement leaders, community members, legal scholars, and public
servants created the procedural justice strategy and concept to address the lack of police
legitimacy in communities of color and the perceived and experienced violence directed at the
African American community (Quattlebaum et al., 2018).
Despite community-based policing strategies and the application of procedural justice
principles, police departments have yet to realize complete alignment of procedural justice
principles with organizational culture. Moreover, although celebrated for progress toward just
policing, the African American community continues to experience racially disproportionate
outcomes across the country (Pryce & Whitaker, 2022). These circumstances make the selected
police department ideally suited for this study and its aligned research questions.
The Researcher
My most influential identity that shapes and influences my opinions on this study is as a
cisgender, 51-year-old African American man. I have spent my life navigating various
professional, social, and institutional landscapes to find acceptance, inclusion, and security for
my Blackness. The one area in which I have struggled to find safety and ease of identity
existence has been in institutional landscapes. It has always been easy for me to relate and have
good one-on-one relationships with individuals from diverse backgrounds; however, challenges
arose when I felt my identity submerge in more extensive institutional settings that differed from
61

my experience. I could always traverse around and through various circles and institutions as the
only Black man; however, I would find myself in positions where I would have to be the voice
for all Black people (cultural taxation). At times, I became resentful, and it has always led me to
question institutional practices and why I was typically the only Black man in the room or the
organization. Out of curiosity from my White peers, there were times when discussions around
race and organizational success took center stage, but often my White counterparts dismissed the
notion of systemic racism and institutional discrimination because I was the token example.
Several issues emerge from my positionality to consider for this study. First, the research
topic on procedural justice as it applies to the African American community is one that I have
experienced firsthand. I have experienced procedural justice during traffic stops, as I have
experienced procedural injustice and racial profiling during traffic stops. In full disclosure, I
have never experienced a physical altercation, nor have I been a victim of aggressive physical or
verbal coercion; however, the potential did exist had I asserted my rights or challenged the
officer’s legitimacy and reasons for the engagement.
Another positionality issue to consider is my firsthand experience growing up in an
underserved community of color where African Americans and other People of Color were
routinely subjected to unjust policing. I have witnessed police brutality inflicted on African
American community members who were falsely predetermined as guilty of a crime or infraction
of the law.
At the time of this study, I did not work for the police department, nor had I ever been
employed by any law enforcement agency. I did not hold any position of power or influence over
any police officer’s career, nor was I associated with any groups that directly or indirectly
influence law enforcement. Although my experiences guide my research, I am committed to
62

increasing police legitimacy and community security and decreasing outcomes where excessive
force is leveraged against African American community members.
I sought to research and better understand law enforcement practices and procedural
justice in the African American community. Specifically, I aimed to explore how the African
American community and the law enforcement industry/judicial system can address the
experienced and perceived disproportionate use of force directed at the African American
community. With little to no explanation of why the behavior of police brutality, either perceived
or experienced, is allowed to continue, the recent abuses and murders of men like George Floyd,
Daunte Wright, Lt. Caron Nazario, and Ronald Greene continue to expose the underbelly of
police discrimination, racial bias, and the use of force into the national spotlight.
As a father of African American children, I have a personal stake in collaborating with
law enforcement agencies to find equitable solutions to procedural justice and overall police
reform. In addition to my role as a father, I am also an influencer, an agent of change, a guardian,
and a potential victim. The law enforcement industry can do better, and as a community, people
should come to the table collectively with sustainable solutions to keep communities safe while
increasing police legitimacy. In the end, we are all stakeholders.
The two main power structures that intersect with my identities concerning aggressive
policing and the modern policing culture are racism and eurocentrism. In contrast to Whiteness
in America, African Americans are often seen as threats and more likely to be criminalized by
false labels such as thugs, super-predators, social deviants, or guilty before proven innocent
(Lyle & Esmail, 2016). My positioning as an African American enables me to view the problem
as an educated, successful, global citizen who has survived professional and unprofessional
encounters with law enforcement agencies. The wisdom that I carry and may offer to this area of
63

interest is patience and emotional intelligence. I worked to mitigate and understand any blind
spots and the reciprocal causation effects of perception, perspective, fear, and the lack of
empathy associated with legalized positions of power/authority.
Data Sources
Survey data were collected utilizing the online Qualtrics software program licensed
through the University. The survey questions were created to address the research questions and
inform the conceptual framework and KMO influences. Confidentiality and anonymity were
ensured for participants by limiting the access to the survey data to the researcher. For this study,
the expertise utilized came from the committee members, University advisors, and the outside
consulting source that completed the analysis and coding of the open-ended survey questions,
and the researcher. At no time did the outside consulting source have access to the identities of
the participating organization. The participating organization had an assigned pseudonym that
only the committee members, the individual organization, and researcher knew. The survey was
designed to minimize the collection of data that may have identifiable information. No names
were collected; however, if any of the survey responses correlated to a specific individual, or if a
name was mentioned in any of the open-ended responses, it was redacted prior to analysis and
destroyed at the completion of the study. The researcher maintained the security of the data. The
research data came from online survey reports, notes and draft dissertation, individual and
private conversations with each department’s administrators, and recommendations and counsel
from the dissertation committee members.
Method 1: Survey
The survey measured the PCPD goal of 100% implementation and demonstrated use of
procedural justice for all officers. The survey provided a formative view of the use of procedural
64

justice, how it aligns with the organization’s goal, and the KMO influences that may impact
police officers achieving that goal. The survey covered constructs of declarative and procedural
knowledge for knowledge influences; task-value, specifically interest, utility, and importance, for
motivation; and cultural modeling and cultural settings for organizational influences. The survey
protocol can be found in Appendix B.
Method 2: Open-Ended Survey Questions
The open-ended survey questions provided additional information to provide further
insights and recommendations on departments’ goals to implement procedural justice throughout
their ranks. The response to the open-ended questions may directly or indirectly correlate to the
department’s motivation and organizational influences to improve relations within the African
American community and police legitimacy.
Method 3: Document Analysis
Documents provided tertiary data to correlate survey data and aid in identifying gaps in
departments’ alignment with procedural justice implementation. Specifically, policies, vision
statements, and training documents that outline and speak to the implementation of procedural
justice. The outcome of document analysis can help triangulate strengths, weaknesses, and
existing gaps that impact each department’s implementation of procedural justice..
Participants
The primary stakeholders chosen for this study are police officers who work and interact
with African American communities. While a complete analysis would involve all stakeholders,
police officers served as the focus of this study. The PCPD’s goal is to increase police legitimacy
in the African American community by establishing a procedural justice training program and
having all sworn officers demonstrate competence and acceptance of procedural justice policing
65

by July 2023. Police legitimacy will be evident by a survey measure of a 10% increase in African
American community support of their police officers. Police officers were specifically chosen as
the primary stakeholders because they are responsible for learning, performing, and delivering
procedural justice to effect change. They will determine whether police agencies achieve their
goals to increase police legitimacy and reduce violent outcomes or ultimately fail and succumb
to the status quo and continued disparagement. Police officers were chosen because they are the
only stakeholder group that can accurately identify the KMO gaps from which recommendations
can be derived.
Purposeful sampling is the intended method for participant recruitment. Purposeful
sampling allowed for a focus on police officers who primarily work in the African American
community and other communities of color. Purposeful sampling is a non-random sampling
method that allows for selecting specific demographics or individuals with particular
characteristics (Johnson & Christensen, 2015). In this study, it is necessary to measure and
model the appropriate environment to recommend viable solutions for consideration.
Instrumentation
The primary instrumentation for this study was a quantitative survey with some open-
ended questions. Surveys are a helpful way to measure attributes, behaviors, abilities, and
thoughts (Robinson & Leonard, 2019). In agreement with Robinson and Leonard, A. Fink (2013)
suggested that surveys are useful in obtaining information about people and complex behaviors
and can be perceived as less threatening, particularly when researching sensitive topics. Fink’s
position on surveys and sensitivity aligns with this study because the implementation of
procedural justice is at the core of the national discussion surrounding race, policing, and police
reform.
66

The survey constructed for this study consisted of 40 Likert-scale questions and four
open-ended questions. Specifically, the survey asked one administrative question, seven
demographic questions, seven knowledge questions, 12 motivation questions, 13 organizational
questions, and four open-ended questions. These 44 questions cover five themes to support
officers’ procedural justice application assessment. First, the initial assessment of survey
questions was demographic questions used for comparison purposes only. Second, an assessment
of police officers’ knowledge of procedural justice was included to measure and understand their
knowledge of procedural justice and if they could apply the principles of procedural justice while
on duty. Third, questions also identified motivational influences, including interest, utility, and
the importance of procedural justice application. Fourth, questions assessed organizational
cultural models and settings. These questions measured organizational influences regarding
policy, behavioral modeling, and environmental and cultural norms. Lastly, questions asked how
officers can be better supported. These questions gave the respondents a voice to provide
information beyond the initial KMO gap analysis.
Using the survey to support the participation of the PCPD enabled me to learn more
about the participants using statistical analysis and identify correlations or patterns. For a
qualitative component, the survey included four open-ended questions to allow the participants
to respond in a narrative format. The survey questions were designed to address the KMO
influences on the implementation and application of procedural justice. To ensure the survey’s
validity in measuring these influences, USC faculty, professional scholars, and law enforcement
administrators reviewed the survey questions, and over 40 USC Rossier students field-tested
them. Appendix B presents the survey protocol.
67

Data Collection Procedures
Data for this study were collected through an online survey created with Qualtrics, an
online survey application accessed through my university student account. Qualtrics is the most
feasible application due to the geographical distance between the researcher and the designated
study site. Before starting the online survey, all participants received a general information sheet
about the purpose of the study, the meaning and benefits of their participation, and the informed
consent document that outlined confidentiality of the data collection and the approach to keep the
participants safe and anonymous. After they read the general information sheet, participants were
asked to consent to the survey. Once the participants began, the survey took approximately 15 to
20 minutes to complete. At the conclusion of the survey, the participants received a note of
thanks for their participation in the survey and were thanked for their service to the country.
After completing the survey, the participant’s results were recorded. Informed consent and
Qualtrics information form can be found in Appendix C.
Once approved by the IRB office, the link to the Qualtrics survey to each point of contact
or organizational representative for mass dissemination to participating officers was released.
Over a 120-day period (January–May 2022), the participants had the option to access the survey
in any environment they choose. The survey was monitored by the researcher, who provided a
touch-point status report to the organizational representatives on a weekly basis until the survey
window expired. The purpose of providing the organizational representatives a weekly touch-
point status update was to ensure there is encouragement for maximum participation. At the end
of 120 days, the data were compiled and analyzed and included the findings in the final
dissertation.
68

Data Analysis
Survey questions were both quantitative and open-ended. I applied descriptive statistics
for quantitative analysis; however, I analyzed the responses to the open-ended questions through
coding.
Method 1: Survey
The analysis leveraged the Qualtrics automated features to provide an ordinal response to
format the closed-ended scales that formed the core of the survey instrument (Harrison, 2021)
The survey questions were aligned to inform aspects of the KMO constructs. Descriptive
statistics explained survey characteristics using frequency and central tendency (Fink, 2013).
Patterns relative to the assumed causes related to knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences were identified. Gaps caused by a deficiency in knowledge were categorized by
declarative and procedural knowledge. Gaps caused by a deficiency in motivation were
categorized by task value, specifically, intrinsic, extrinsic, and attainment value. Cultural models
and cultural settings categorized gaps caused by a deficiency in organization. The results of the
data analysis informed the solutions directed at closing the gaps identified.
Method 2: Open-Ended Survey Questions
An outside source was used to code the data from the open-ended survey questions. TI
Verbatim Consulting (TIVC) services as utilized to code and identify potential response
categories for the open-ended questions. Once all the responses were read through and the
coding categories were identified, the researcher, in conjunction with TIVC, went back through
the open-ended responses and coded them into the identified coding groups. The method for
coding qualitative data differs widely depending on the research objective. At TIVC, this process
involves the common practice of reading through the qualitative data, applying codes to excerpts
69

based on the context in which they are being used, conducting various rounds of coding
(independently and collectively), grouping codes according to themes, and then making
interpretations that lead to the initial findings. In this process, the research analyst used NVivo
and Quirkos software to assist with the coding process, while the industrial psychologist verified
by hand to identify trends and themes separately and subsequently review each finding to ensure
accuracy. The experts started with an initial round of coding to summarize or describe excerpts
and then conduct a second round of coding that added an interpretive lens. Next, they discussed
the findings with the researcher to compare the quantitative data findings for correlation to
quantitative data and for integration into the report of findings.
Method 3: Document Analysis
Analysis of public facing documents was used to correlate training data with the survey
findings and was instrumental in identifying gaps in departments’ goals to implement procedural
justice. All the relevant documents were uploaded into Quirkos, a software analysis tool, and was
coded for common themes. Public documents were examined for the procedural justice training
curriculum, training frequency, cultural modeling in policy, and cultural setting in departments’
application of procedural justice.
Validity and Reliability
The survey instrument was designed and purposely written to address the designated
KMO influences. In qualitative research, content validity is defined by how accurate a method
measures what it is designed to measure (Mayo, 2015; Robinson-Kurpius, & Stafford, 2006).
Creswell (2008) suggested that validity in quantitative research depends on the ability to draw
meaningful and valuable inferences from survey replies. Likewise, Mayo (2015) suggested an
instrument’s reliability refers to its accuracy and dependability in a study. To improve content
70

validity, the survey questions were developed during the Inquiry II university course. During this
course, there were several opportunities to have the survey items critiqued by peers and the
course instructor (Salkind, 2014). Furthermore, the research instrument was reviewed and piloted
by multiple university professors not associated with the course and by senior ranking law
enforcement officials from non-surveyed departments.
Lastly, the dissertation committee members ensured continued improvements and
refinements before the official release of the survey. The survey was administered through
Qualtrics, an online survey instrument designed to capture data from anonymous participants.
Confidentiality was maintained at all times, and all participants remained anonymous as no
identifiable information was recorded. Data analysis was conducted at the end of the survey
period, and at completion of the study, all geographical data were deleted. Ensuring
confidentiality and anonymity helped with participants being honest in their responses. The
increased propensity for authentic responses likely contributed to the validity of the survey
(Salkind, 2014). To increase the response rate, weekly touchpoints with PCPD point of contact
was conducted to encourage and ask for reminders to be sent to police officers who had not
completed the survey after the initial distribution.
Ethical Implications
The study was approved by the University of Southern California (USC) Institutional
Review Board (IRB) and conducted with the participants’ informed consent. The respondents
actively gave their consent to participate in the survey. Before participation, subjects were made
aware, in writing, of the context and the value of their contribution to the study. They were also
informed of their right to speak freely without retribution, and at any point, they could end their
participation in the study. Given the current scrutiny and political environment, I ensured
71

transparency and neutrality with all participants was secured. Complete authenticity and true
responses from the participants were anticipated. The participants were made aware that their
responses would be part of the solution to create sustainable policing policies centered on
community relations with law enforcement. It was clear that the results of the study would be
used to support organizational success, improve police legitimacy, and improve relations in
communities of color. To ensure full disclosure and transparency, consent forms included a
description of what the research is about, what questions to be asked, the risks and benefits of
participation, and the promise to always protect confidentiality and anonymity.
There are no associated risks in this study; however, there are risks for the survey to be
aware of. These risks include the willingness to trust and participate in the study because the
sensitive nature of the topic, the stigma associated with participating in race, cultural, and
behavioral surveys, applied obligation, and the time it takes away from the participants’ duty and
family. These risks were mitigated by ensuring complete transparency; making the survey
mechanism efficient and expedient, giving the participants the opportunity to express their
individual thoughts, ideas, and solutions to better policing; and maintaining strict confidentiality.
The data was managed by the researcher and, at no time did the committee members, TVIC, or
administrative points of contact had access to the delivery platform’s administrative rights.
Participants received the contact information for USC Rossier School of Education, the
dissertation chair, and for the researcher, so they had a person to contact at any time if they had
questions or concerns about the study. This study included human subjects, and the researcher
completed the mandatory certification and submit verification to the IRB for approval. All
participants were over the age of 21.
72

Limitations and Delimitations
The limitations of this research include the number of police officers who might not
complete the survey because of the nature of the questions and the involvement of race, biases,
and the impact of procedural justice on a specific demographic. Furthermore, this research aims
to survey police officers in multiple regions; time limitations may be a factor in analyzing the
data. Another limitation is that respondents took the survey in each of their regional departments;
therefore, cultural and environmental factors cannot be controlled. In addition, although all
participants were assured anonymity and no possibility of retaliation or evaluation of their
responses, the truthfulness of responses cannot be predicted or controlled.
Delimitations are the decisions the researcher makes that bring implications for the study.
These delimitations include the survey only targeting the main stakeholders and not the
stakeholders who are the victims. Therefore, perspectives on increasing police legitimacy and
cooperation and decreasing the use of force instances and physical altercations are solely from
police officers’ views. Finally, while it would be beneficial to understand how African
Americans perceive and receive procedural justice during law enforcement engagements, they
are outside the scope of this study.

73

Chapter Four: Results and Findings
Findings from data collection are reported in this chapter as they relate to the knowledge,
motivation, and organization influences that impact PCPD patrol officers’ use of procedural
justice in the African American community. The gap analysis approach (Clark & Estes, 2008;
Rueda, 2011) aided in analyzing the influences and barriers in knowledge and skills, motivation
task values, and organizational culture. The gap analysis approach identified solutions that PCPD
can implement to effectively demonstrate procedural justice practices and principles to improve
police legitimacy and overall community support within the African American community. In
addition, this quantitative study aimed to understand:
1. What are officer’s knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences that
support or hinder patrol officer’s use of procedural justice while serving and
protecting the African American community?
2. What recommendations will address the gaps in knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences that negatively impact an officer’s ability to utilize
procedural justice philosophies?
To address the research questions, the researcher conducted a 44-question online
survey. The data collection for this study took place from Jan 10, 2022, to April 29, 2022, and
focused on PCPD patrol officers primarily assigned to African American communities or
communities with over 50% of African Americans. The targeted sample size for the survey was
200; however, 174 participants initiated a response to the survey, meeting a 95% confidence rate
and a 5% margin of error for data collection.
74

Survey Methodology
The 174 research participants were surveyed remotely using Qualtrics, a private online
company used for data collection and analysis. To ensure the confidentiality of the participants,
the researcher specifically enabled the anonymous functionality for the surveys, as well as
disabled the IP address functionality to ensure participants IP addresses was not collected. Once
the participants clicked on the survey link, the researcher introduced the informed consent
requirement for the research. The informed consent form introduced the purpose, risks, benefits,
and contact information and thanked the participants for giving their voice to the study. At the
end of the informed consent form, the participants were required to select “yes,” consent to
participate in the study, or “no,” do not consent to participate. If the participant selected no, they
were directed to the end of the survey and thanked for their time. If the participant selected yes,
they were directed to the beginning of the survey.
The researcher asked a total of 40 Likert scale questions and four open-ended questions.
The 44 questions consisted of: two administrative questions, six demographic questions, seven
based on knowledge influences, 12 on motivation influences, 13 on organization influences, and
four on open-ended questions. The four open-ended questions asked the participants: to further
explain how procedural justice could be better implemented in their department, how to improve
relationships in communities of color, how to improve retention in their departments, and any
additional thoughts or comments from previous questions or comments to add for consideration.
The survey took approximately 15–20 minutes to complete.
Data Analysis
This research aimed to reveal the participants’ knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences that either support or hinder their use of procedural justice principles while on patrol
75

in communities of color. The survey design facilitated the data analysis process; the question
groups were organized into the following categories: participant demographics, knowledge
influences, motivation influences, organization influences, and four open-ended questions to help
better understand influences and other perspectives that may or may not fit within the KMO
structure. The results in this section came from the data analysis of 163 participants currently
serving as sworn law enforcement officers in the PCPD. In addition, an analysis of public-facing
documents directly related to PCPD procedural justice guidance, policies, and training was
conducted.
Participating Stakeholders
The primary stakeholder group that participated in the study were sworn officers serving
in the PCPD. PCPD officers’ participation in this study was critical to understanding the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that supported or hindered officers’ use of
procedural justice principles while serving African American communities and other
communities of color.
Survey Participants
Quantitative data was collected from January 10, 2022, through April 29, 2022. The
qualitative data came from 163 survey responses from PCPD officers over the age of 18. A total
potential population of PCPD respondents was 200. A total of 174 PCPD officers opened the
survey; however, of the 174 respondents that opened the survey, one did not consent. Table 6
displays the demographic data on the 173 respondents.
76

Table 6
Demographic Participants Response
Survey participants’ response (n = 173)
Number of
survey
participants
Respondent % % of survey
completed
Comments
7 4% 2.0% Selected consent to survey but did
not proceed to additional
questions
3 2% 18% Answered demographic questions
only
3 2% 34% Answered questions for knowledge
influences only
4 2% 61% Answered questions for knowledge
and motivational influences only
5 3% 91% Answered all 40 Likert-scale
questions only
151 86% 100% Answered all 40 Likert-scale
questions in addition to the four
open ended questions

Survey participants were asked six demographic questions to understand better the
overall analysis and the specific KMO influences that support or hinder police officers’ use of
procedural justice in their working environments. Public-facing documents that account for
officers who self-describe as transgender, non-conforming, or non-binary were unavailable;
however, PCPD maintains a long-standing transgender, gender non-conforming, and non-binary
employee guide. Law enforcement officers who identify as the above-mentioned are supported
77

by an outreach coordinator, employee relations group, and volunteer mentors. Table 7 illustrates
the participants gender identification.

Table 7
Gender
Survey participants’ response (n = 155)
Gender Count Participant % PCPD %
Male 99 63.87% 82%
Female 45 29.03% 18%
Non-binary 3 1.94%
Prefer not to say 8 5.16%
Self-describe 0 0.00%

Survey participants had the option to select an identity that best described their ethnicity.
Other demographic identifiers included the years in service, age category, the highest level of
education completed, and organizational rank. Tables 8 and 9 illustrate the demographic
identities the participants provided.

78

Table 8
Ethnicity
Survey participants’ response (n = 166)
Ethnicity Count Participant % PCPD %
Asian 13 7.83% 9.6%
Black/AA 17 10.24% 11.2%
White 58 34.94% 34.1%
Hispanic/Latinx 47 28.31% 44.6%
Native American 1 0.60% 0.3%
Pacific Islander 6 3.61% 0.2%
Prefer not to respond 22 13.25%
Prefer to self-describe 2 1.20%

Table 9
Demographics
Survey participants’ years in service count (n = 154)
< 5 years 6–10 years 11–15 years 16–20 years >20 years
Number of
years in
service
59 40 15 23 17
Survey participants age (n = 153)
20s 30s 40s 50s 60+
Participants
age category
31 70 41 11 0
Survey participants’ education level (n = 154)
High school Associate Bachelor’s Master’s Doctorate
Completed
education
level
27 29 80 14 4
Survey participants rank (n = 151)
Patrol
officer
Detective Sergeant Other Cmd staff
Rank 110 2 17 18 4

79

Determination of Assets and Needs
This gap analysis study utilized three data sources: surveys, open-ended survey questions,
and public-facing documents from the PCPD. To validate or determine whether the assumed
causes were assets (strengths) or needs (weakness), quantitative data were collected using a
survey with 40 Likert-scale questions. The survey results validated the assumed knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences. The criteria used to validate survey data for factors
that support, or hinder patrol officers’ use of procedural justice were as follows: results with less
than 90% of agreement indicated a need or weakness at the PCPD. Results greater than or equal
to 90% of agreement indicated an asset or strength at the PCPD. Ninety percent was chosen as
the cutoff due to the high-stakes nature of law enforcement as it relates to political landscapes,
policy and funding, public safety, and police legitimacy.
Results for Knowledge Causes
The results for knowledge causes were reported using the knowledge categories as
described Krathwohl’s (2002) framework for knowledge. Krathwohl’s framework divides
knowledge into factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge. For this study,
declarative knowledge and procedural knowledge were used to measure the survey results. The
knowledge causes were divided by survey results, open-ended questions, and document analysis.
Declarative Knowledge: Influence 1
Police officers need to know what procedural justice concepts are and why it is important
to increase police legitimacy.
Survey Results
Participants were asked the following question regarding their declarative knowledge and
understanding of procedural justice:
80

1. What is your understanding of procedural justice?
2. Procedural justice principles are important in regard to improving community
relations.
3. I am confident I received the proper amount of procedural justice training to enable
me to meet my departments expectations.
Assessing the responses to the first question, participants were asked what their
understanding of procedural justice principles was as they were presented with five choices,
including the option to select all that apply. The five choices were treating others with dignity
and respect, conveying trustworthy motives, providing others a voice for input, maintaining
neutrality, and I am unfamiliar with procedural justice principles. Tables 10 and 11 illustrate the
participants’ understanding of procedural justice principles and their understanding of procedural
justice principles by time in service.

Table 10
Understanding
What is your understanding of procedural justice principles (n=152)
Outcome Count Participant %
Selected all four principles 89 58%
Selected three of four principles 26 17%
Selected two of four principles 13 9%
Selected one of four principles 21 14%
Selected unfamiliar with principles 2 2%

81

Table 11
Time in Service
Time in service for participants who selected all four principles (n=89)
Time in service Count Participant %
Less than 5 years 33 37%
5–10 years 23 26%
11–15 years 10 11%
16–20 years 15 17%
21–25 years 5 6%
26–30 years 1 1%
30+ years 2 2%

Although PCPD officers’ response to the first question showed a weak correlation to their
declarative knowledge of procedural justice, they showed a strong correlation to declarative
knowledge when asked about the importance of procedural justice in improving community
relations. The combined result for this question resulted in a 97% agreement. In addition, PCPD
officers showed strong confidence when asked if they received the proper amount of procedural
justice training to meet their departments’ expectations. The net result shows a combined 88% of
PCPD officers agreed they were confident they received the proper amount of procedural justice
training to meet their departments’ expectations. Table 12 illustrates the participants’ response to
the importance of procedural justice to community relations. Table 13 shows participants’
position on receiving the proper amount of training to meet expectations.

82

Table 12
Community Relations
Procedural justice principles are important regarding improving community relations (n = 154)
Selection Count Participant %
Strongly Agree 96 62.3%
Agree 53 34.4%
Disagree 5 3.3%
Strongly Disagree 0 0.0%

Table 13
Confidence in Training
I am confident I received the proper amount of procedural justice training to enable me to meet
my departments expectations (n=154)
Selection Count Participant %
Strongly Agree 53 34.4%
Agree 82 53.2%
Disagree 14 9.1%
Strongly Disagree 2 1.3%
No training 3 2.0%

83

Open-Ended Survey Findings
Participants were asked how can procedural justice be better implemented throughout the
department? Assessing this open-ended question for declarative knowledge showed that
participants understood the principles of procedural justice but felt a need for yearly instruction
that strengthened their ability to retain and use their knowledge during scenario-based training.
For example, one participant suggested PCPD “implement more scenario-based training to better
understand the application of procedural justice,” while another recommended PCPD “conduct
semi-annual facilitated discussions on procedural justice scenarios to highlight and refresh
officers’ understanding of procedural justice principles and application.” Participants were also
asked whether there were any other thoughts or additional comments from previous questions
they would like to add for consideration. Assessing this question showed a need to implement,
track, assess, and report assigned procedural justice knowledge-based training. Participants
expressed that “Western Region Commission POST should make procedural justice training
mandated by adding it to the Continued Professional Training (CPT)-Perishable Skills Program
(PSP).”
Document Analysis
Documents reviewed for this influence include the PCPD training curriculum used to
instruct cadet-officers at the training academy, procedural justice training and policy assessment,
interdepartmental correspondence, and community engagement bulletin. Cadet-officers receive
instruction on defining procedural justice, principled policing, and police legitimacy. The
principled policing instruction aims to understand how procedural justice leads to greater police
legitimacy and how the concepts relate to addressing crime. Figure3 illustrates the results of the
84

coding from the abovementioned documents, and it illustrates the dominant themes of procedural
justice principles as it relates to declarative knowledge.

Figure 3
Declarative Knowledge

85

Summary
Chapter Two reviewed literature presented data showing that police officers are not
widely exposed to or trained in procedural justice principles. A reasonable assumption of the
researcher was that without procedural justice training and application evaluation, police officers
would be declaratively and procedurally deficient in terms of their knowledge of procedural
justice principles. For this study, the researcher defines the police officers’ knowledge as
deficient when less than 90% of the survey respondents could not accurately identify all four
principles of procedural justice. The findings indicated some knowledge of assets but supported
the need for further development of procedural justice declarative knowledge for PCPD patrol
officers. An initial training process existed for cadet-officers under instruction at the police
academy. However, development opportunities were identified in all three categories of data
analysis.
The assumed influence that police officers need to know what procedural justice concepts are
and why it is important to increase police legitimacy was determined to be a need by the PCPD
survey. Although the open-ended survey questions and the document analysis supported
participants’ knowledge and understanding of procedural justice, the survey response showed
only 58% were able to identify all four procedural justice tenants. Therefore, based on the overall
results of the assumed influence, an improvement is required for this cause.
Procedural Knowledge
Influence 1
Police officers need to possess the knowledge of how to use procedural justice in their
daily interactions with the public.
86

Survey Results. Participants were asked the following question regarding their
knowledge of how to use procedural justice in their daily interaction with the public.
1. I understand how to apply procedural justice principles while serving the public.
The participants’ responses to the question showed that most agreed. Overall, the
combined results indicated 98% of the participants stated they understood how to apply the
principles while in public. Therefore, the threshold for being considered an asset was met. Table
14 illustrates the participants’ understanding of applying procedural justice principles while
serving the public.

Table 14
Application
I understand how to apply procedural justice principles while serving the public (n = 153)
Selection Count Participant %
Strongly agree 81 53%
Agree 69 45%
Disagree 2 1%
Strongly disagree 1 1%

87

Influence 2
Police officers need to possess the knowledge of when to use procedural justice during
official police engagements with the public.
Survey Results. Participants were asked the following questions regarding their
knowledge of when to use procedural justice in their daily interaction with the public.
1. It is possible to implement procedural justice principles while on duty.
2. Procedural justice principles may apply to (select all that apply)
Assessing the participants’ responses overall, 98% stated they understand how to apply
the principles while in public. Table 15 illustrates the participants’ belief in the possibilities of
applying procedural justice principles while on duty.

Table 15
While on duty
I understand how to apply procedural justice principles while serving the public (n=154)
Selection Count Participant %
Strongly agree 72 47%
Agree 76 49%
Disagree 5 3%
Strongly disagree 1 1%

88

For the second question, participants were asked to select all that apply to situations in
which procedural justice may be applied. Again, participants were given four choices, including
selecting all that apply. The four choices were: improving community support, increasing police
legitimacy, decreasing forceful outcomes, and decreasing use of force complaints. Tables 16 and
17 illustrate the participants’ responses to the application of procedural justice and their
responses by time in service.

Table 16
Application of Procedural Justice
Procedural justice principles may apply to (n=148)
Outcome Count Participant %
Selected all four outcomes 86 56%
Selected three of four outcomes 25 17%
Selected two of four outcomes 25 17%
Selected one of four outcomes 15 10%

89

Table 17
Time in service
Time in service for participants who selected all four outcomes (n=83)
Time in service Count Participant %
Less than 5 years 30 36%
5–10 years 21 25%
11–15 years 10 12%
16–20 years 15 18%
21–25 years 5 6%
26–30 years 1 1%
31+ years 2 2%

Open-Ended Survey Findings. Participants were asked how can procedural justice be
better implemented throughout the department? Assessing this open-ended question for
procedural knowledge showed that participants understood how to use procedural justice
principles; however, several respondents asserted that they needed additional and refresher
procedural justice training and more community involvement to increase the use of procedural
justice application. For example, one respondent suggests “procedural justice should be
discussed regularly and should be woven into every training when applicable,” and another felt
the need for “annual demonstrations of procedural justice principles.” Several other survey
respondents expressed that limited resources, lack of personnel, and limited time negatively
impacted the proper implementation of procedural justice. Other responses cited police officers
struggled with other issues while policing, such as dealing with the homeless, mental illness,
civil unrest, and the constant threat of violence. All of these responses were perceived as highly
emotionally charged situations that inhibit procedural justice implementation. Participants were
also asked whether there were any other thoughts or additional comments from previous
questions they would like to add for consideration? Participants believed that procedural justice
90

was being implemented during routine patrol; however, some felt that it was not embedded in the
bedrock of policing interactions because of emotionally charged situations. For example, one
responded stated “procedural justice is not imbedded in the bedrock of police interactions” and
that “policing is very hard to do when we handle emotionally charged situations.”
Document Analysis. Documents reviewed for this influence include the PCPD training
curriculum used to instruct cadet-officers at the training academy, procedural justice training and
policy assessment, interdepartmental correspondence, and community engagement bulletin. In an
academic setting, cadet-officers are familiarized with the application of procedural justice
through academic discussion. In addition, cadet-officers discuss the impact of procedural justice
application and how it leads to principled policing and police legitimacy. Figure 4 illustrates the
results of the coding from the abovementioned documents. It illustrates the dominant themes of
procedural justice principles as it relates to procedural knowledge.

91

Figure 4
Procedural Knowledge

Summary. The assumed influence that police officers need to know how to use
procedural justice in their daily interactions with the public was determined to be a need. The
PCPD survey and the document analysis supported participants knew how apply procedural
justice principles. However, the participants’ responses to the application of procedural justice
remained low. Additionally, the open-ended questions showed a need for reoccurring training on
the use of procedural justice because of potential atrophy or perishing of skills. Overall, 83%
92

participants showed agreement to this influence; however, based on the threshold, an
improvement is required for the cause.
Results and Findings for Motivational Causes
The results and findings for motivational causes were reported using the motivation
categories described by Clark and Estes’s (2008) and Pintrich’s (2003) framework for
motivation. Clark and Estes framework divides motivation into task value, expectancy outcome,
self-efficacy, attributions, goal orientation, goals, and affect. Task value motivation was used for
this study to measure the survey results. Specifically, the intrinsic (interest) value, extrinsic
(utility) value, and the attainment (importance) value.
Task Value
Influence 1
Police officers need to maintain an interest in learning procedural justice principles in
order to find enjoyment and satisfaction in procedural justice application.
Participants were asked the following questions regarding their intrinsic (interest) value
motivation on using procedural justice in their daily interaction with the public. Participants were
given four choices; strongly agree, agree, disagree, and strongly disagree.
1. I have a positive opinion of the use of procedural justice.
2. I have had positive experiences with using procedural justice while on duty.
Assessing the participants’ responses to the first question indicated that 94% of the
participants’ agreed to having a favorable opinion of procedural justice. Table 18 illustrates the
participants response to having a positive opinion of procedural justice. For the second question,
participants were asked if they had positive experiences using procedural justice while on duty.
93

A total of 97% decided that they had positive experiences using procedural justice while on duty.
Table 19 illustrates the participants response about their experiences using procedural justice.

Table 18
Opinion
I have a positive opinion of the use of procedural justice (n = 152)
Response Count Participant %
Strongly agree 68 45%
Agree 75 49%
Disagree 8 5%
Strongly disagree 1 1%

94

Table 19
Experience
I have had positive experience using procedural justice while on duty (n = 149)
Response Count Participant %
Strongly agree 57 45%
Agree 87 49%
Disagree 5 3%
Strongly disagree 0 0%

Influence 2
Police officers need to see the value in procedural justice principles and determine the
knowledge, skills, and understanding of procedural justice are worth learning.
Survey Results. Participants were asked the following questions regarding their extrinsic
value (utility) motivation for using procedural justice in their daily interaction with the public.
Participants were given four choices; strongly agree, agree, disagree, and strongly disagree.
• I find the procedural justice principle “showing dignity and respect” useful while
performing my duties.
• I find the procedural justice principle “maintaining neutrality” useful while
performing my duties.
• I find the procedural justice principles “giving the subject a voice” useful while
performing my duties.
• I find the procedural justice principle “maintaining trustworthiness” useful while
performing my duties.
• Procedural justice is important to my future goals in policing.
Participants had four choices: Strongly agree, agree, disagree, and strongly disagree.
95

Assessing the participants’ responses to the first question about finding the procedural
justice principle “showing dignity and respect” useful revealed a combined 99% of the
participants agreed that showing dignity and respect was beneficial to performing their duties.
Table 20 illustrates the participants’ response to the usefulness of showing dignity and respect
while on duty. For the second question, assessing the participants’ responses to finding the
procedural justice principle “maintaining neutrality” useful revealed that 98% of the participants
agreed that maintaining neutrality was helpful in performing their duties. Table 21 illustrates
their responses.

Table 20
Dignity and respect
I find the procedural justice principle “showing dignity and respect” useful while performing
my duties (n = 151)
Response Count Participant %
Strongly Agree 96 64%
Agree 53 35%
Disagree 2 1%
Strongly disagree 0 0%

96

Table 21
Neutrality
I find the procedural justice principle “maintaining neutrality” useful while performing my
duties (n = 151)
Response Count Participant %
Strongly agree 90 60%
Agree 58 38%
Disagree 3 2%
Strongly disagree 0 0%

The third question asked participants if giving their subject a voice was useful while
performing their duties. The results showed a combined 96% of participants agreed that giving
the subject a voice was useful while performing their duties. Table 22 illustrates participants’
responses to the usefulness of giving their subjects a voice while on duty. The fourth question
asked the participants if maintaining trustworthiness was useful while performing their duties.
The results showed a combined 99% of the participants agreed that maintaining trustworthiness
was valuable while performing their duties. Table 23 illustrates participants’ responses. For the
fifth question, participants were asked if procedural justice is important to their future goals in
policing. The results showed that, essentially, 95% of the participants agreed that procedural
justice is important to their future goals in policing. Table 24 illustrates the responses.

97

Table 22
Voice
I find the procedural justice principle “giving the subject a voice” useful while performing my
duties (n = 151)
Response Count Participant %
Strongly Agree 74 49%
Agree 71 47%
Disagree 6 4%
Strongly disagree 0 0%

Table 23
Trustworthiness
I find the procedural justice principle “maintaining trustworthiness” useful while performing
my duties (n = 151)
Response Count Participant %
Strongly Agree 88 58.3%
Agree 61 40.4%
Disagree 2 1%
Strongly disagree 0 0%

98

Table 24
Future goals
Procedural justice is important to my future goals in policing (n = 151)
Response Count Participant %
Strongly Agree 48 32%
Agree 95 63%
Disagree 8 5%
Strongly disagree 0 0%

Influence 3
Police officers need to believe that procedural justice principles are critical to their self-
concept as a legitimate authority and see the value of infusing procedural justice into their daily
duties.
Survey Results. Participants were asked the following questions regarding their
motivation related to attainment value (importance) and using procedural justice in their daily
interaction with the public. Participants were given four choices; strongly agree, agree, disagree,
and strongly disagree.
• When practicable, there is value in utilizing procedural justice during my interaction
with the public.
• Using procedural justice during my routine encounters with the public has benefits to the
building of public trust.
• Using procedural justice makes my job easier.
Participants had four choices: Strongly agree, agree, disagree, and strongly disagree.
99

Assessing the participants’ responses to the first question showed that an overall, 99% of
the participants agreed that when practicable, there is value in utilizing procedural justice during
their interactions with the public. Table 25 illustrates the responses.

Table 25
Value
When practicable, there is value in utilizing procedural justice during my interactions with the
public (n = 149)
Selection Count Participant %
Strongly agree 87 58.4%
Agree 60 40.3%
Disagree 2 1%
Strongly disagree 0 0%

100

For the second question, assessing the participants’ responses to the use of procedural
justice and its benefits revealed that 97% agreed that the use of procedural justice during routine
encounters benefits the building of public trust. Table 26 illustrates the participants’ responses.
The third question asked participants if using procedural justice made their jobs easier. The
results showed that 95% agreed that procedural justice made their jobs easier. Table 27 illustrates
participants’ responses.

Table 26
Value
Using procedural justice during my routine encounters with the public has benefits to the
building of public trust (n = 150)
Response Count Participant %
Strongly agree 90 60%
Agree 56 37%
Disagree 4 3%
Strongly disagree 0 0%

Table 27
Ease of performance
using procedural justice makes my job easier (n = 150)
Response Count Participant %
Strongly agree 53 35%
Agree 90 60%
Disagree 6 4%
Strongly disagree 1 1%

101

Open-ended survey findings. Participants were asked how procedural justice can be better
implemented throughout the department. Assessing this open-ended question for motivation
showed that participants saw interest, utility, and the importance of procedural justice. For
example, one respondent suggested procedural justice “should start at the academy, then add
additional training to the line staff of custody division and patrol divisions, then to those who
have not been introduced to it yet.” However, several respondents asserted that limited resources,
accountability, staffing, and doing more with less were several demotivators that may hinder or
erode police officers’ motivation to use procedural justice. For example, one respondent stated,
“stop with the mentality of doing more with less” and “communicate staffing plan that address
manpower shortages. “One respondent noted that several procedural justice courses were “taught
by people who were considered anti-law enforcement. They used their class time by pointing
fingers at law enforcement and telling them they were wrong. They treated law enforcement in a
way they did not want to be treated.”
Document Analysis. Documents reviewed for this influence include the PCPD training
curriculum used to instruct cadet-officers at the training academy, procedural justice training and
policy assessment, interdepartmental correspondence, and community engagement bulletin.
Figure 5 illustrates the results of the coding from the abovementioned documents as it applies to
motivation (task value). These results show the weight of attainment value or importance as it
relates to procedural justice.

102

Figure 5
Motivation Task Value

Summary. Motivation, learning, and performance may be improved if the person values
the task (Clark & Estes, 2008; Pintrich, 2003). As it relates to intrinsic value or interest, the
assumed influence that police officers need to maintain an interest in learning procedural justice
principles to find enjoyment and satisfaction in procedural justice application was determined to
be an asset by the PCPD survey report. The survey report showed an average of 95.5%
agreement on motivational interest for procedural justice. Extrinsic value or utility assumed
influence that police officers need to see the value in procedural justice principles and determine
the knowledge, skill, and understanding of procedural justice are worth learning was determined
to be an asset by the PCPD survey report. The survey results showed an average of 97%
agreement on the utility of procedural justice. Attainment value or the importance assumed
103

influence that police officers need to believe that procedural justice principles are critical to their
self-concept as a legitimate authority and see the value of infusing procedural justice into their
daily duties was determined to be an asset by the PCPD survey report. The survey results showed
an average of 97% agreement on the importance of learning procedural justice.
Results and Findings for Organizational Causes
The results and findings for organizational causes are reported using the organizational
categories as described by Schein (2010), and Clark and Estes (2008) framework for the
organization. The organizational framework divides the organization into cultural models and
cultural settings. For this study, cultural models and cultural settings were used to measure the
survey results. The organizational causes were divided by survey results, open-ended questions,
and document analysis.
Cultural Models
Influence 1
PCPD leadership needs to emulate, encourage, and support internal use of procedural
justice as part of its culture.
PCPD participants were asked the following questions regarding their organizational
cultural models. Participants were given four choices; strongly agree, agree, disagree, and
strongly disagree.
1. I have positive experiences using procedural justice within my organization.
2. Procedural justice is embraced internally up and down the chain of command.
3. My organization leadership encourages and supports the use of procedural justice
even if it means taking more time at every radio call.
4. My organization leaders set a good example for the use of procedural justice.
104

5. My organization is committed to achieving police legitimacy through procedural
justice.
Participants had four choices: Strongly agree, agree, disagree, and strongly disagree.
Assessing the participants’ responses to the first question showed in sum, 89% of the
participants agreed to have had positive experiences using procedural justice within their
organization, which is above the threshold. Table 28 illustrates the participants’ responses.

Table 28
Experience
I have positive experiences using procedural justice within my organization (n = 147)
Response Count Participant %
Strongly agree 33 22%
Agree 99 67%
Disagree 14 10%
Strongly disagree 1 1%

105

Participants were asked if procedural justice was embraced up and down the chain of
command for the second question. The results indicated only 64% agreed, which is below the
threshold. Table 29 illustrates the participants’ responses. Participants were also asked whether
their organizational leadership encourages and supports the use of procedural justice, even if it
means taking more time at every radio call. The results indicated, on average, 77% of the
participants agreed with this statement, which is below the threshold. Table 30 illustrates the
participants’ responses. The fourth question asked participants if their organizational leaders set
a good example for using procedural justice. The combined result for agreement showed that
68% of the participants agreed that their leaders set a good example for procedural justice, which
is below the threshold. Table 31 illustrates the responses. In the fifth question, the participants
were asked whether their organization was committed to achieving police legitimacy through
procedural justice. The results indicated that 80% of the participants agreed that their
organization was committed to achieving police legitimacy through procedural justice, which
meets the asset threshold. Table 32 illustrates participants’ responses.

Table 29
Embracing
Procedural justice is embraced internally up and down by the chain of command (n = 145)
Response Count Participant %
Strongly agree 18 12%
Agree 75 52%
Disagree 46 32%
Strongly disagree 6 4%

106

Table 30
Leadership Support
My organizational leadership encourages and supports the use of procedural justice, even if it
takes more time at every radio call (n = 147)
Response Count Participant %
Strongly agree 26 18%
Agree 87 59%
Disagree 33 22%
Strongly disagree 1 1%

Table 31
Leadership Example
My organizational leaders set a good example for the use of procedural justice (n = 147)
Response Count Participant %
Strongly agree 20 14%
Agree 80 54%
Disagree 42 29%
Strongly disagree 5 3%

107

Table 32
Commitment to police legitimacy
My organization is committed to achieving police legitimacy through procedural justice
(n = 146)
Response Count Participant %
Strongly agree 27 19%
Agree 89 61%
Disagree 29 20%
Strongly disagree 1 1%

Open-Ended Survey Findings. Participants were asked how procedural justice can be
better implemented throughout the department. Their responses indicated a dissonance between
two perceptions: inconsistency in the internal application and leadership’s failure to model the
behaviors related to procedural justice. In response to these questions, participants made the
following comments:
• “procedural justice should be embraced up and down the chain of command,
unfortunately it is not.”
• “I think we understand procedural justice, but internally, its not always displayed as
an example.”
• “more leadership involvement.”
Participants were also asked what leaders can do to help improve department retention. The
responses supported the perception that leadership failed to modeled procedural justice behavior.
Participants responded with the following comments:
• “Treat officers better. Provide them with the tools they need to do the job and not turn
their back on officers.”
• “Supporting officers by giving us a voice.”
108

• “Build trust. I feel law enforcement officer do not feel safe. Officers’ feel like their
department will cut them loose at any moment when the court of public opinion does
not like them or the action they took in the field. Many officers joind to help people,
they want to be loyal to the cause. In todays climate, it feels like a us verses them
mentality and officers do not know who they can trust, so they are willing to leave.”
Finally, participants were asked if there were any other thoughts or additional comments
from previous questions they would like to add for consideration. The themes that arose from
their responses were that procedural justice should be a top-down phenomenon (much like
culture versus climate in an organization), leaders need to model this behavior in a practical way
so that subordinates can emulate it, and all should implement procedural justice. Participants’
responses included:
• “Procedural justice should be displayed from top down not bottom up.”
• “Procedural justice is a tool that will work only if fully embraced from the top
• down and demonstrated internally and externally.”
• “procedural justice is embraced within my department, but is not often
demonstrated.”
• “The best way to align with procedural justice is practice internally to display the
behaviors they want to see externally”
• “I’m not sure if there is a commitment to procedural justice up thrrough the
• entire command.”
• “Model behavior is more important than preaching it.”
Document Analysis. Documents reviewed for this influence include the PCPD training
curriculum used to instruct cadet-officers at the training academy, procedural justice training and
109

policy assessment, interdepartmental correspondence, and community engagement bulletin.
Figure 6 illustrates the results of the coding from the abovementioned documents as it relates to
organizational cultural models. These results show the weight of cultural modeling as it relates to
procedural justice.

Figure 6
Organizational Cultural Models

110

Summary. The assumed influence that PCPD leadership needs to emulate, encourage,
and support the internal use of procedural justice as part of its culture was determined to be a
need by both the survey and the open-ended survey responses. Though the survey showed
participants had positive experiences using procedural justice principles internally, the combined
average response for organizational modeling resulted in 76%, which is below the 90%
threshold. The results of the survey open-ended responses also showed the influence to be a
need. The participants in this study embrace the concept of internal procedural justice; however,
they overwhelmingly indicated a lack of procedural justice modeling by their leadership team.
Influence 2
The second organizational influence examined in this study was that the PCPD needs to
mandate mandatory procedural justice training as part of its culture. Participants were asked the
following questions regarding their organizational cultural settings:
• My organization shows commitment to an internal procedural just environment.
• There are no significant organizational barriers that prevent me from using procedural
justice
• My organization maintains a policy or policies that support procedural justice
Participants had four choices; strongly agree, agree, disagree, and strongly disagree.
Participants were asked to rate their level of agreement to the following question
regarding their organizational commitment to internal procedural justice: “My organization
shows commitment to an internal procedural just environment.” The combined threshold average
resulted in 73% of survey participants agreeing, and 27% were in disagreement. Participants’
responses are illustrated in Table 33

111

Table 33
Internal Environment
My organization shows commitment to an internal procedural just environment (n = 146)
Response Count Participant %
Strongly agree 25 17.1%
Agree 82 56.2%
Disagree 34 23.3%
Strongly disagree 5 3.4%

For question number two, participants were asked to rate their level of agreement with
the following statement; “there are no significant organizational barriers that prevent me from
using procedural justice.” Assessing the results showed a combined average of 73%, which is
below the threshold. Table 34 illustrates participants’ responses to this question. The last
question for this influence asked participants to rate their agreement with whether their
organization maintains a policy or policies that support procedural justice. The results indicated
that 90% of the survey participants agreed, and 10% disagreed with the statement. Table 35
illustrates the participants’ responses.

112

Table 34
Organizational Barriers
There are no significant organizational barriers that prevent me from using procedural justice
(n = 147)
Response Count Participant %
Strongly agree 24 16%
Agree 83 57%
Disagree 40 27%
Strongly disagree 0 0%

Table 35
Organizational Policy
My organization maintains a policy or policies that support procedural justice (n = 145)
Response Count Participant %
Strongly agree 47 32%
Agree 84 58%
Disagree 14 10%
Strongly disagree 0 0%

113

Open-Ended Survey Results. Overall, participants perceived existing barriers in
organizational settings came down to leadership commitment to set the example and prioritize
inculcation of procedural justice into the culture. Though policies are in place, participants
believe their leadership actions are not congruent with the policies they want to enforce. In
response to cultural settings, participants made the following comments:
• “Procedural justice is a positive perception and should include training from the
ongoing throughout officers’ careers.”
• “Focus on working conditions that help facilitate the goal of policing. That goal is to
stop or reduce crime. It says so in my department’s mission statement.”
Document Analysis. Documents reviewed for this influence include the PCPD training
curriculum used to instruct cadet-officers at the training academy, procedural justice training and
policy assessment, interdepartmental correspondence, and community engagement bulletin.
These documents correlate to participants’ responses, agreeing that their organization maintains
policies that support procedural justice. Figure 7 illustrates the results of the coding from the
abovementioned documents as it relates to organizational cultural settings.

114

Figure 7
Organizational Cultural Settings

Summary. The survey determined the assumed influence that PCPD needs to mandate
procedural justice training as part of its culture as a partial need. The combined response average
for organizational settings resulted in a 79% average below the asset threshold. Though the
document analysis supports the respondent’s belief in existing policies that support procedural
justice, the net result remains a need for potential improvements. The participants in this study
embrace the concept of internal procedural justice; however, they indicated a need to improve
their organizational settings that are inclusive of procedural justice.
115

Summary of Validated Influences
The summary for validated influences for knowledge resulted in a needs improvement
with a combined average of 82%. Although PCPD officers are familiar with procedural justice
principles and can apply it during their interactions with the public, there are area’s where
negative influences degrade or interfere with their use of the principles. Validated influences for
motivation resulted as a strength (asset) with a combined average of roughly 97%. PCPD officers
viewed procedural justice principles as a valued approach to improving community safety and
increasing police legitimacy. Validated influences for organization resulted in a needs
improvement with a combined average of roughly 78%. PCPD officers found value in the use of
internal and external procedural justice principles; however, they believed that procedural justice
principles were not embraced or properly modeled by their leadership. Specifically, PCPD
officers found their leadership use of procedural justice principles were not congruent with thier
policies and goals to achieve police legitimacy. Table 36 illustrates the summary of validated
influences.

Table 36
Validated Influences
Survey summary of validated influences based on a 90% threshold
Factor Category % Asset or need
Knowledge Declarative Knowledge 81% Need
Procedural Knowledge 83% Need

Motivation

Task Value, Intrinsic 96% Asset
Task Value, Extrinsic 97% Asset
Task Value, Attainment 97% Asset

Organization Cultural Models 76% Need
Cultural Settings 79% Need

116

Chapter Five: Discussion, Recommendations, and Evaluation
Chapter four presented the results and findings from the survey, the open-ended survey
questions, and document analysis to answer the first research question. The first research
question aimed to identify the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that support
or hinder officers’ use of procedural justice.
Chapter five considers the second research question: “What recommendations will
address the gaps in knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that negatively impact
officers’ ability to utilize procedural justice philosophies?” This chapter presents specific
solutions to the organization’s validated needs. This chapter will conclude with a proposed plan
to implement and evaluate the recommendations to address the needs.
Purpose of the Study and Questions
The purpose of this study was to conduct a needs analysis in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources necessary to reach the organizational performance goal
of ensuring 100% of PCPD officers are trained on the concepts of procedural justice. The
analysis began with generating a list of potential needs and then transitioned to examining these
needs systematically to focus on the determined or validated needs. While a complete needs
analysis would focus on all stakeholders, for practical purposes, the stakeholder of focus in this
analysis was the PCPD patrol officers. Therefore, the questions that guided this study were the
following:
1. What are the knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences that support or
hinder patrol officers’ use of procedural justice while serving and protecting the
African American community?
117

2. What recommendations will address the gaps in knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influenced that negatively impact an officer’s ability to utilize
procedural justice philosophies?
Discussion, Solutions, and Recommendations
The assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences discussed in the
following sections were determined to be either assets or needs during data collection. Chapter
four was dedicated to the completion of data analysis and key findings that resulted from a
qualitative study directed at the stakeholder group (patrol officers) as well as reviews of relevant
documents and artifacts. The findings are represented in the form of themes that emerged from
an examination of the data that answered the research questions. Furthermore, the results also
validated the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that impact the stakeholder’s
focus as they continue to work and improve their knowledge, understanding, and application of
procedural justice principles to achieve the organizational goal.
This chapter discusses recommendations for each of the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences identified as assets and needs in chapter four. Knowledge, motivation,
and organization assets and needs are categorize in four sections. Each section will begin with a
table that summarizes the knowledge, motivation, and assumed organizational influence,
identification as an asset or need, the evidence-based principle supporting any related
recommendations, and a context-specific recommendation solution.
Both assets and needs are analyzed, and recommendations are provided to ensure PCPD
maintains its high standard of continuity, consistency, and commitment to serving the public. In
this case, continuity will ensure that PCPD maintains its high standards from year to year.
Consistency will also ensure that all sworn PCPD officers receive the same training across all
118

departments. Commitment will ensure that the procedural justice training program serves to
improve community relations, increase police legitimacy, and reduce negative outcomes.
Knowledge Recommendations
The knowledge influences shown in Table 37 represent three assumed knowledge
influences critical to achieving the stakeholder’s goals. The analysis of the influences revealed
that the survey participants have considerable knowledge in each area; however, developing
procedural justice principle retention and overall declarative knowledge is still needed.
Specifically, declarative knowledge displayed both assets and needs; however, the overall
average fell below the determined threshold, which resulted in a need. Procedural knowledge
highlighted the same results with assets and needs; however, the overall outcome resulted in a
needs. Table 40 illustrates the summary of knowledge influences, along with evidence-based
principles to guide context-based recommendations for improving performance in this area.

Table 37
Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed knowledge
influence
Need
or
asset
Principle and citation Context-specific recommendation
Declarative
Police officers need to
know what
procedural justice
concepts are and
why it is important to
increase police
legitimacy
Need Declarative
knowledge is
understanding ‘the
what and the why’
of circumstances or
facts (Launspach,
2008).

Procedural
knowledge
increases when
declarative
Replace current PCPD procedural
justice curriculum with a
curriculum that incorporates the
rigor of Bloom’s Taxonomy to
better understand the what and
the why of circumstances or
facts.

In addition to lectures, group
discussions and sharing of
personal experiences, provide
interactive instruction
119

Assumed knowledge
influence
Need
or
asset
Principle and citation Context-specific recommendation
knowledge required
to perform the skill
is available or
known (Clark &
Estes, 2008).

Acquiring skills for
expertise frequently
begins with learning
declarative
knowledge about
individual
procedural steps
(Clark & Estes,
2008).

opportunities that enable
participants to demonstrate,
deconstruct, and debrief scenario
based vignettes.

Provide police officers with self-
directed computer based training
(CBT) or learning management
system (LMS) opportunities that
reintroduce and reinforce
procedural justice principles that
lead to principled policing and
police legitimacy.

Procedural
Police officers need to
possess the
knowledge of how to
use procedural
justice in their daily
interactions with the
public.
Asset Procedural
knowledge is the
type of knowledge
required for an
individual to know
how or when to
do a particular task
(Aguinis & Kraiger,
2009; Krathwohl,
2002; Launspach,
2008).

Continued practice of
procedural
knowledge
promotes
automaticity and
takes less capacity
in working memory
(Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006)
Provide police officers with job
aids and checklist to remind them
to continue to incorporate internal
and external procedural justice
principles.

Police officers need to
possess the
knowledge of when
to use procedural
justice during official
Need To develop mastery,
individuals must
acquire component
skills, practice
integrating them,
Provide poilice officers with job
aids, training videos, and roll call
training discussions to remind
them when to incorporate
procedural justice principles to
120

Assumed knowledge
influence
Need
or
asset
Principle and citation Context-specific recommendation
police engagements
with the public.
and know when to
apply what they
have learned
(Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006)

bolster procedural justice
education, traning,
professionalism, and community
perceptions of PCPD officers.

Work with the Western Region
Comission on POST to
mandate continued training by
adding procedural justice
principles to CPT-PSPm (PSP).

Declarative Knowledge Solutions
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) suggested that knowledge is the degree to which
learners know and understand the information they were taught. The four types of knowledge are
factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive (Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011). This study
merged factual knowledge with conceptual knowledge and referred to it as declarative
knowledge. Metacognition does not apply to achieving the stakeholders’ goals. Therefore, the
first component of knowledge for this study is declarative. Obtaining skills for proficiency
begins with learning declarative knowledge about individual steps (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Declarative knowledge is the recall and understanding of learned facts and concepts within
organizations, structures, or policies (Krathwol, 2002). It refers to facts or information stored in
one’s memory that describes things, events, processes, attributes, and their relation to each other
(Krathwol, 2002). Declarative knowledge is knowledge about something (Azevedo & Aleven,
2013), which is the knowledge of what one knows and can be achieved through training,
121

information, job aids, and education (Clark & Estes, 2008). Based on the findings of this study,
PCPD officers must work to improve and retain their declarative knowledge.
The results and findings of this study indicate that 58% of the participants were able to
identify all four procedural justice principles. Subsequently, 17% were able to identify three of
four principles, 9% two of four, and 14% one of four. Further, of the participants who identified
all four principles, 37% served less than 5 years, 26% served between 5 and 10 years, 11%
served between 11 and 15 years, 17% served between 16 and 20 years, 6% served between 21
and 25 years, and 1% served between 26 and 30 years. This trend in declarative knowledge
shows a decline over time, suggesting that declarative knowledge is a perishable skill.
Gupta et al. (2009) suggest that declarative knowledge is essential because it underscores
skills, measures, and procedures required to meet goals and is at the core of complex decision-
making. Given that law enforcement officers often engage in complex decision-making by the
minute, continued trainings for declarative knowledge is vital to the core of their job
performance. Procedural knowledge increases when declarative knowledge required to perform
the skill is available and known (Clark & Estes, 2008). To achieve their departments’ goals,
PCPD officers must know the ‘what and why’ of circumstances and facts (Launspach, 2008).
While the study found that PCPD officers understood procedural justice, it also found
declarative knowledge gaps in retaining the four procedural justice principles. It is therefore
recommended that PCPD incorporate the following evidence-based additions to address
declarative assets and needs:
1. Revise and update the current procedural justice training curriculum with a
curriculum that includes the rigor of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Blooms Taxonomy is based
on a specific hierarchy of learning (understand, apply, analyze, evaluate, and create),
122

each level is critical to achieving more profound, more advanced cognitive skills and
abilities (Krathwohl, 2002). Figure 8 illustrates Bloom’s Taxonomy Heiarchy and
levels of learning. The combination of procedural justice training curriculum and
Bloom’s Taxonomy will elevate police officers’ declarative knowledge from
understanding to applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating knowledge for
procedural justice principles.
2. In addition to lectures and group discussions, incorporate interactive instruction that
enables participants to demonstrate, deconstruct, and debrief procedural justice
principles during scenario-based vignettes.
3. Provide officers with computer-based training (CBT) opportunities that reintroduce
and reinforce procedural justice principles that lead to principled policing and police
legitimacy.

Figure 8
Bloom’s Taxonomy

123

Procedural Knowledge Solutions
Procedural knowledge is the type of knowledge required for an individual to know how
or when to do a particular task (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009; Krathwohl, 2002; Launspach, 2008).
Furthermore, procedural knowledge is knowing how to take the steps needed and when it is
needed to achieve desired excellence in policing to meet the legal and social demands of the job
(Launspach, 2008). To develop mastery, individuals must acquire the skills, practice integrating
them, and know when to apply what they learned (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). Furthermore,
Schraw and McCrudden (2006) suggest that continued practice of procedural knowledge
promotes automaticity and takes less capacity in the individual working memory. When PCPD
officers properly use procedural knowledge, they may decrease physical altercations and increase
community collaboration, public safety, and positive perceptions that lead to police legitimacy.
In addition, these later outcomes would be considered positive deposits in the bank of trust. An
example of procedural knowledge is a PCPD officer’s know-how during a traffic stop to use
procedural justice in order to create positive community perceptions.
PCPD officers must also know when to use procedural justice based on environmental
factors and circumstances. For instance, a PCPD officer conducting a traffic stop on a fleeing
vehicle suspected of an armed robbery and leaving the scene of an accident would use an
equitable response by taking precautions to detain the suspects in the vehicle. After the suspects
are in custody and are no longer deemed a threat to themselves, the public, and the investigating
officer, procedural justice should be used with the suspects and the observing community
members.
The findings from this study indicate that 98% of survey participants knew how to apply
procedural justice principles; however, only 58% understood when to use these principles to
124

achieve a determined outcome. The how to use procedural justice is determined to be an asset;
however, the when to apply procedural justice is determined to be a need. Overall, procedural
knowledge is determined to be a need for further development.
Skogan et al. (2015) and Wood et al. (2019) contended that training and recall of
procedural knowledge increase the propensity for police to use procedural justice strategies in
the community. Providing police officers with knowledge of how to perform procedural justice,
when to perform procedural justice, and why it is essential enables them to use their knowledge
and skills to increase community trust and reduce physical confrontation incidents and physical
harm in the African American community. It is therefore recommended that PCPD incorporate
the following evidence-based additions to address procedural knowledge assets and needs:
1. Provide PCPD officers with job aids and checklist to remind them to continue to
incorporate procedural justice principles.
2. Provide PCPD officers’ with additional job aids, training videos, and roll call training
discussions to remind them when to incorporate procedural justice principles to
bolster procedural justice education, training, professionalism, and community
perceptions of PCPD officers.
3. Work with POST commission to mandate continued procedural justice training by
adding procedural justice principles to the CPT-PSP.
Motivation Recommendations
Motivation is essential for accomplishing the stakeholder’s goals of implementing a
training program that focuses on procedural justice principles by May 2023 to ensure 100%
procedural justice trained command staff personnel by September 2023 and a 10% increase in
African American community support through demonstrated procedural justice competence by
125

July 2024. In addition to knowledge, motivation is a key influence on performance (Clark &
Estes, 2008). According to Mayer (2011), motivation is an internal state that initiates and
maintains focused, goal-directed behaviors. Consequently, motivation is demonstrated by active
choice, persistence, and mental effort (Clark & Estes, 2008). When these motivation factors are
combined with knowledge, performance is enhanced (Clark & Estes, 2008).
The data from this study did not show any significant gaps in motivation in the areas
explored, specifically task value (intrinsic, extrinsic, attainment). Furthermore, PCPD
participants strongly responded to all motivation influences in the areas of motivation. Table 38
outlines these motivational influences as assets along with evidence-based principal citations and
recommendations.

Table 38
Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed knowledge
influence
Need
or
asset
Principle and citation Context-specific recommendation
Task Value
Police officers need to
maintain an interest
in learning
procedural justice
principles in order to
find enjoyment and
satisfaction in
procedural justice
application
Asset Learning and
motivation are
enhanced when
learners have
positive
expectations for
success (Pajares,
2006).

As police officers
continue to gain
comfort with the
use of procedural
justice principles,
the positive effect is
likely to strengthen
Continue to nurture intrinsic value
by incorporating meaningful
testimonies (community
members, subjects, and PCPD
officers) into training events.
126

Assumed knowledge
influence
Need
or
asset
Principle and citation Context-specific recommendation
their initial intrinsic
motivation levels
(Zapata-Phelan et
al.,2009).
Police officers need to
see the value in
procedural justice
principles and
determine the
knowledge, skill, and
understanding of
procedural justice
principles are worth
learning
Asset Individuals are more
likely to engage in
an activity when it
provides value to
them (Eccles,
2009).

Learning and
motivation are
enhanced if the
learner values the
task (Eccles, 2006).

Continue to nurture extrinsic value
by providing training that
emphasizes the value and
importance of developing
strategies for procedural justice
application.
Police officers need to
believe that
procedural justice
principles are critical
to their self-concept
as a legitimate
authority and see the
value of infusing
procedural justice
into their daily
duties.
Asset Rationales that
include a discussion
of the importance
and utility value of
the work or learning
can help learners
develop positive
values (Eccles,
2006; Pintrich,
2003).
Continue to nurture attainment
value by providing training that
emphasizes the value and
importance of developing
strategies for procedural justice
application.

Task Value Solutions
There are three types of values PCPD officers must possess to achieve the goal of
implementing procedural justice principles into their professional environment: intrinsic
(interest), extrinsic (utility), and attainment (importance). Intrinsic value is engaging in an
activity for its inherent satisfaction, which means that individuals display intrinsic motivation
because the task is enjoyable or exciting, rather than the pressure to do it or an incentive, reward,
127

or deadline (Ryan & Deci, 2000). For example, members of the PCPD community may have
intrinsic motivation because they enjoy serving as a guardian and keeping their communities safe
(Clark & Estes, 2008; Pintrich, 2003; Clark, 1999). Extrinsic value or utility is the relationship
between the task and the individual’s goals. PCPD officers may find learning the principles of
procedural justice useful because its important to their future goals, or they may value the reward
or outcome (Wigfield, 1994). Attainment value refers to the importance of doing well on a
specific task (Clark & Estes, 2008). It is important for PCPD officers to learn procedural justice
principles because it will serve their image of who they are and who they want to be. As public
servants, they must serve the African American community with due diligence.
Intrinsic value. Intrinsic motivation is a key factor in police officers’ success because it
involves the experience of a positive effect while tasks are completed (Izard, 1977; Pretty &
Seligman, 1984; Reeve et al., 1986; Vallerand, 1997). Pajares (2006) posited that learning and
motivation are enhanced when learners have positive expectations for success. Participants
reported feeling a deep since of intrinsic motivation towards procedural justice principles. An
example of policing in the context of intrinsic value is police officers using procedural justice
principles because they enjoy their roles as guardians, seek satisfaction through service, and
maintain an active interest in community perceptions. Survey results indicate that intrinsic value
is an asset to PCPD’s goals; therefore, it is recommended that PCPD continue to nurture intrinsic
motivation by incorporating meaningful testimonies into training events to show interest.
Officers need to know that their interest in procedural justice application yields positive
outcomes. As police officers continue to gain comfort with using procedural justice principles,
the positive effect is likely to strengthen their intrinsic motivation levels (Zapata-Phelan et
al.,2009). Through shared testimonies, PCPD officers can continue to motivate themselves and
128

others to use procedural justice principles by focusing on rewards, such as interest, satisfaction,
and enjoyment (Zapata-Phelan et al.,2009).
Extrinsic Value. Extrinsic or utility value is determined through enhanced learning and
motivation if the learner values the task or if the task aligns with an individual’s goal (Eccles,
2006). For example, applying procedural justice principles can reduce physical altercations and
citizens’ complaints and increase police legitimacy and community trust (President’s Task Force
on 21st Century Policing, 2015). An example of utility motivation is when police officers feel
that the knowledge, skills, and understanding of procedural justice principles are worth learning
because there is a practical application and purpose. Eccles (2009) suggests that individuals are
more likely to engage in an activity when the task provides value to them.
As stated in the stakeholder’s goal, the task value for police officers is to demonstrate
competence and acceptance of procedural justice policing. The worthwhile practical application
and purpose will be shown by a 10% increase in support from the African American community.
Therefore, police officers’ utility motivation will be high because accomplishing the task will
help police officers attain their goal by increasing police legitimacy, community safety, and
community trust. Survey results indicate that extrinsic value is an asset to PCPD goals; therefore,
it is recommended that PCPD continue to nurture extrinsic motivation by incorporating
meaningful testimonies into training events to show utility.
Attainment Value. Attainment value is the importance individuals attach to a specific
task related to the conception of their identity and ideals or competence in a given domain
(Wigfield, 1994). An example of attainment value is a police officer who aligns their personal
goals with their organization’s goals, such as learning procedural justice principles to foster a
positive perception of professionalism. It is essential for police officers to learn procedural
129

justice principles through goal setting because those principles would eventually impact their
behavior in the field. The more procedural justice is used by police officers in their daily duties,
the more their behavior will garner support from the public (Mazerolle et al., 2014). These
outcomes will demonstrate to citizens that the police are doing a better job, which can reflect
positively on the officers who use attainment motivation to employ procedural justice principles
(Mazerolle et al., 2014).
The recommendation is to continue to nurture attainment value by providing training
emphasizing the value and importance of developing strategies for procedural justice application.
Rationales that include discussing the importance and utility value of the work or learning can
help learners develop positive values (Eccles, 2006; Pintrich, 2003). The results and findings
illustrate that PCPD officers believed that procedural justice principles are critical to their self-
concept as a legitimate authority and see the value of infusing procedural justice into their daily
duties as an asset. Therefore, it is recommended that PCPD continue to nurture attainment
motivation by incorporating meaningful testimonies into training events to show importance.
Organizational Recommendation
In addition to knowledge and motivation, organizational influences determine whether
stakeholders can perform their roles while achieving their goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). For
instance, failure to provide adequate policies, procedures, and materials can prevent
organizations from accomplishing their performance goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). Furthermore,
Clark and Estes (2008) suggested that organizations have their own culture, including informal
barriers, processes, and formal barriers that, when combined, make gap analysis more complex.
Clark and Estes (2008) continue to suggest that organizational culture is the core values, goals,
beliefs, emotions, and processes that individuals at the organization learn over time.
130

As shown in Table 39, both assumed organizational influences were determined to be
actual needs. Specifically, cultural models and settings were determined to be needs. For the
organizational influences classified as needs, evidence-based principles were identified to guide
context-based recommendations for improving performance in this area.

Table 39
Organizational Influences and Recommendations
Assumed
knowledge
influence
Need
or
asset
Principle and citation Context-specific
recommendation
Cultural models
The PCPD
leadership needs
to emulate,
encourage, and
support the
internal use of
procedural
justice as part of
its culture.
Need Perceiving procedural justice
is associated with greater
pay satisfaction, supervisor
satisfaction, management
satisfaction, and
commitment to the
organization (Abel, 2003;
Gallimore & Goldenberg,
2001).

Police officers’ use of
procedural justice with the
public derives from how
their senior officers and
organizational leaders treat
them (Paoline, 2004;
Reuss-Ianna, 2017).
Provide policies encouraging
PCPD command staff and
leaders to emulate and apply
procedural justice principles to
junior PCPD officers.

Ensure 100% PCPD command
staff receive procedural justice
training by September 2023.
Cultural settings
The PCPD needs
to mandate
mandatory
procedural
training as part
of its culture
Need Persistent focus on
procedural justice
processes and training
creates legitimacy for
officers and a foundation
for community values
(Tyler & Fagan, 2008).
Work with the Western Region
Commission on POST to
mandate continued training by
adding procedural justice
principles to CPT-PSP.

Mandate training that provides
certified educational units.

131

Cultural Model Solutions
Organizational culture is better understood when viewed from two stances: cultural
models and cultural settings (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Cultural models are the ingrained
assumptions and shared normative understandings of how organizations operate (Gallimore &
Goldberg, 2001; Rueda, 2011; Yildiz, 2014). A cultural model of internal procedural justice in
law enforcement organizations could help police officers be better stewards of external
procedural justice in their public interactions (Mazerolle et al., 2014). Scholars suggest the
perception of procedural justice is associated with greater pay satisfaction, supervisor
satisfaction, management satisfaction, and commitment to the organization (Abel, 2003;
Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). In contrast, a lack of internal procedural justice has been linked
to counterproductive work behaviors (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001). Van Craen (2016a)
argued that perceptions of internal procedural justice must be met to promote police officers’
practices of external procedural justice.
The results and findings of this influence indicate that 89% of survey participants had
positive experiences using procedural justice within their organization, 64% agreed that
procedural justice was embraced internally throughout the chain of command, 77% agreed that
their leadership encourages and supports the use procedural justice even if it means taking more
time at every radio call, 68% agreed that their leaders set a good example for the use of
procedural justice, and 80% agreed their organization is committed to achieving police
legitimacy through procedural justice. Overall, 76% of survey respondents agreed with this
influence, which, is below the stated threshold and, therefore, is a need.
Police officers’ use of external procedural justice with the public derives from how they
are treated internally by their senior officers and organizational leaders (Paoline, 2004; Reuss-
132

Ianna, 2017). It is therefore recommended that PCPD ensure 100% of PCPD command staff
leaders receive procedural justice training by September 2023. The more PCPD officers are
exposed to internal procedural justice principles, the more likely they will use them in the field.
To support and improve PCPD officers’ behaviors on the merits of procedural justice, command
staff and department leaders must create policies that encourage senior leaders to adopt and
model procedural justice within their organizations.
Cultural Setting
Cultural settings are visible manifestations of the underlying cultural models (Gallimore
& Goldenberg, 2001; Rueda, 2011). Examples of cultural settings are a lack of institutional
goals, performance incentives, training, resources, and appropriate communications (Rueda,
2011). In addition, cultural settings can include conflicting goals, restrictive policies and
practices, and bureaucratic work misaligned with the organizations’ goals (Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001).
To achieve its organizational goals, PCPD could benefit from creating a mandatory
training program on procedural justice applications. Law enforcement organizations with
procedural justice as a core value have a better chance of increasing officers’ use of procedural
justice and improving their interactions with the community (Holihen et al., 2021). Tyler and
Fagan (2008) argued that the persistent focus on procedural justice processes and training creates
legitimacy for officers and a foundation for community values. In agreement, Wood et al. (2019)
suggest procedural justice training bolsters officers’ behaviors that help promote public
compliance and build trust and legitimacy.
Robertson and Chaney (2019) presented three ways procedural justice training and
application could render positive relations between police officers and African Americans. First,
133

implementing procedural justice training and holding police accountable may reduce the
potential for officer misconduct (Robertson & Chaney, 2019). As officers practice the procedural
justice principle of dignity and respect with the African American community, respect might be
reciprocated, which increases the possibility of perceived legitimacy and community assistance
in solving crimes (Weitzer, 2000). Second, emphasizing procedural justice in training can change
organizations’ and individuals’ behaviors (Robertson & Chaney, 2019). For example, the
Chicago Police Department’s use of procedural justice training changed officers’ behaviors, as
assessed by a 10% reduction in complaints and a 6.4 % reduction in force against civilians
(Wood et al., 2020). Third, requiring mandatory procedural justice training can promote positive
reform to lessen the power of the blue wall of silence and motivate officers to increase their
legitimacy in the African American community by treating these citizens fairly and equitable
(Balko, 2013; Robertson & Chaney, 2019).
The results and findings of this influence indicate that 73% of survey respondents agreed
that their organization showed commitment to a procedural just environment, 73% agreed there
were no significant barriers that prevented them from using procedural justice, and 90% agreed
that their organization-maintained policies that support procedural justice. Although one of the
three responses for this influence is an asset, the overall result for cultural setting influence is a
need. Therefore, it is recommended that PCPD work with the Western Region Commission on
Police Officer Standard Training (POST) to mandate continued training by adding procedural
justice principles to the continued professional training/perishable skills program. In addition to
the mandated training, PCPD should mandate a series of trainings that provide certified
educational units (CEUs) towards annual procedural justice training. If procedural justice
principles are incorporated into trainings, such as implicit bias, de-escalation, domestic violence,
134

or mental health response, partial credit could be given towards the annual procedural justice
training requirement.
The overall outcome of these recommendations would help the PCPD achieve its
organizational goals while increasing community trust and police legitimacy. Furthermore,
procedural justice training for officers will lead to fewer public complaints and decreases
harmful policing practices (Wood et al., 2019). The effectiveness of procedural justice training is
apparent when officers completing procedural justice training are less likely to resolve incidents
with arrests or be involved with arrests where force is present (Owens et al., 2018).
Summary of Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Recommendations
The following recommendations were guided by evidence-based principles and addressed
the knowledge assets and needs. It is recommended that the PCPD enhance declarative
knowledge by (a) revise and update the current procedural justice training curriculum with a
curriculum that includes the rigor of Blooms Taxonomy, which will drive officers declarative
knowledge from understanding to creating knowledge for procedural justice principles; (b)
incorporate interactive instruction that enables participants to demonstrate, deconstruct, and
debrief procedural justice principles during scenario-based vignettes; and (c) provide officers
with access to computer-based training opportunities that reintroduced and reinforce procedural
justice principles.
It is also recommended that the PCPD enhance procedural knowledge by (a) providing
job aids and checklist to remind them to continue to incorporate procedural justice principles, (b)
providing PCPD officers with additional training videos and roll call training discussions to
remind them when to incorporate procedural justice principles, and (c) work with the Western
135

Region Commission to mandate continued procedural justice training by adding procedural
justice principles to the CPT-PSP.
The following recommendations were guided by evidence-based principles and address
motivation assets and needs. To maintain a strong motivation influence throughout the
organization, it is recommended that PCPD continue to nurture intrinsic value by incorporating
meaningful testimonies into the training events; and nurture extrinsic and attainment value by
providing training that emphasizes the value and importance of developing strategies for
procedural justice application.
The following recommendations were guided by evidence-based principles and address
organizational assets and needs. It is recommended that the PCPD enhance cultural models by
(a) creating policies that encourage PCPD command staff and department leaders to adopt and
model procedural justice principles and, (b) ensuring they receive all procedural training by
September 2023.
It is also recommended that the PCPD enhance cultural settings by (a) working with the
Western Region Commission to mandate continued procedural justice training by adding
procedural justice principles to the CPT-PSP, and (b) mandating a series of training that provide
certified educational units towards annual procedural justice training.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Organizational Purpose, Needs, and Expectations
The mission of the PCPD is to safeguard the lives and property of the diverse
communities that they serve by working in collaborative partnerships with them to enforce the
law, preserve peace, enhance public safety, and reduce incidence of crime while improving the
quality of life for all its citizens. With continued national scrutiny, PCPD aims to be proactive by
136

preserving its high standards for law enforcement in all communities; however, it is important
for PCPD to address and repair the longstanding distrust and fear in the African American
community through principled policing and procedural justice initiatives. The PCPD hopes to
decrease excessive use of force outcomes while increasing community trust, collaboration, and
police legitimacy. The PCPD organizational goal is to ensure that by December 2023, all sworn
officers receive extensive training on procedural justice concepts and principles. Furthermore, by
July 2023, all sworn officers will demonstrate competence and acceptance of procedural justice
policing, evident through a 10% increase in African American community support. The desired
outcome for this project was to improve PCPD policing, increase collaboration, and build
bridges of trust and respect with the African American community. In addition, providing the
PCPD with the necessary KMO tools to succeed will benefit the city and its citizens.
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The New World Kirkpatrick Model is used to design an integrated implementation and
evaluation plan for the PCPD program recommended in this study (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016). The objective of Kirkpatrick’s four-level training evaluation model is to measure the
effectiveness of a given training, optimize the transfer of learning to behavior and organizational
results, and demonstrate the value of training to the organization (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016). The four levels of Kirkpatrick’s training and evaluation model used a framework
organized into four levels beginning with Level 4. Level 4 (results) refers to the degree to which
the intended outcome or targeted outcomes occur due to the training. Level 3 (behavior)
addresses the extent to which individuals implement what they learned during the training when
they are back on the job. Level 2 (learning) refers to the degree to which participants acquire the
intended knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and commitment based on their participation in
137

the training. Level 1 (reaction) pertains to the degree to which participants find the training
favorable, engaging, and relevant to their job (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Kirkpatrick’s new world model differs from the traditional Kirkpatrick’s model in that
the traditional model begins with the planning of Level 1 and progresses to Level 4. The re-
imagined new world model begins with planning at Level 4 as it works to Level 1. Kirkpatrick
and Kirkpatrick (2016) suggest that starting with a clear vision of Level 4 Results keeps the
focus on what is most important, the program outcome that is accomplished through improved
performance and training.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) define Level 4 Results as the main reason for
conducting organizational training. Connecting the contributions to outcomes that accomplish
the organization’s mission makes them valuable in that an organization can create a path to
success and avoid dysfunction (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Table 40 illustrates leading
indicators, both internal and external outcomes, and the metrics and methods for measuring
indicators.

138

Table 40
Outcomes
Outcome Metrics Methods
External outcomes
Increase positive perception
and support of community
patrol officers
Increase in community
support, collaboration, and
overall safety. Decrease in
community crime and law
infractions
Survey to measure
community members’
willingness to support
community police officers
and their perception of
police performance in
their community
Decreased incidences of use
of force when making an
arrest or detaining a
subject for further
investigations
Number of incidences by
annual comparison of
metrics to determine the
frequency of use of force
tactics for compliance
Track and review after-
action reports on the use
of force and whether it
was required for
compliance to determine
the level of force applied.
Review cases that required
excessive force
Decreased cases of filed
complaints by community
members
Number of incidences by
annual comparison of
metrics to determine the
frequency of filed reports
by violation (civil rights,
use of force, unlawful
damage to property or
persons, etc.)
Produce and release an
annual report to debrief
departments and
community members on
filed reports, including
adjudication status,
corrective actions, and
lessons learned
Internal outcomes
Procedural training
curriculum improved to
enhance and reinforce
understanding of
procedural justice
principles
Introduce training that
includes interactive
application, analysis,
evaluation, and creation of
procedural justice
knowledge
Police officers to
demonstrate the cognitive,
affective, and
psychomotor application
of procedural justice to
training officers
All command staff trained on
procedural justice
principles
Number of police officers
who completed mandated
procedural justice training
Completed training tracked
for reporting purposes
Create continued learning
opportunities on
procedural justice
principles
Number of police officers
who participate in
continued learning
Addition of procedural
justice training to the
police officers’ standard
training perishable skill
program
139

Outcome Metrics Methods
Annual training and
reinforcement of
procedural justice
principles and application
Number of police officers
who report understanding
procedural justice and their
department’s professional
expectations
Department training or
climate survey to measure
procedural justice
knowledge

Level 3: Behaviors
Critical Behaviors
Level 3 encompasses a comprehensive, continuous performance monitoring and
improvement system (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Critical behaviors are specific actions
that, if performed consistently on the job, will have the most significant impact on organizational
success (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The critical behaviors identified in Table 41 detail
actions PCPD officers will focus on to achieve the organizational goals. Table 41 illustrates three
critical behaviors that PCPD police officers must demonstrate to achieve their performance
goals. These are learning and demonstrating procedural justice principles, reinforcing, or
relearning procedural justice principles through department workshops or accessible CBT/LMS
portals, and meeting with supervisors for walkthroughs and debriefing of principled policing and
procedural justice application. Table 41 illustrates the specific metrics, methods, and timing for
these critical behaviors.

140

Table 41
Evaluation
Critical behavior Metrics Methods Timing
PCPD officers will
learn and
demonstrate
procedural justice
principles.
The number of PCPD
police officers that
completed and met
the initial training
requirement
Training officers and
supervisors will
track the
completion of
initial training
requirement.
Ongoing throughout
the year

PCPD officers will
reinforce or relearn
procedural justice
principles through
department
workshops or
accessible
CBT/LMS.
The number of PCPD
officers that
attended
workshops or
accessed
CBT/LMS
Training officers and
supervisors will
announce
workshop
opportunities and
available resources
for additional
training.
Annual
recertification is
required.
Completed training
and participation
documented
throughout the
year.
PCPD officers will
meet with
supervisors for
walkthroughs and
debriefs on
principled policing
and procedural
justice application.
Supervisor log
entries
Supervisor will
provide a schedule
for patrol officers
to follow.
Incorporate into
schedule on a
continuous basis.

Required Drivers
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) described required drivers as a system of processes
that reinforce, monitor, encourage, and reward the performance of critical behaviors on the job.
It is the degree to which required drivers are identified and implemented as a measure for a
successful plan (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Required drivers are the skills needed to
apply and complete the program successfully. The success of reinforcing the skills and
knowledge learned before and during the program through the support of the organization will
141

result in a successful application when PCPD officers demonstrate knowledge and apply
procedural justice principles. Monitoring and commitment to execute what was learned is the
essential indicator of a program’s success for the learner (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Table 42 illustrates the required drivers to support critical behaviors.

Table 42
Required Drivers
Methods Timing Critical behaviors supported
1, 2, 3
Reinforcing
Provide training to PCPD
command staff on
procedural justice principles
while serving in leadership
roles.
Annually 1, 2, 3
Provide training to PCPD rank
and file on procedural
justice principles and
application.
Annually 1, 2, 3
Supervisors monitor
subordinates’ performance
and provide feedback
regarding principled
policing and procedural
justice principles.
Ongoing 3
Provide job aid and training
packet that denotes the
impact of principled
policing and include all
essential information
regarding procedural justice
principles and application.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Encouraging
Highlight the higher purpose
of implementing procedural
justice principles rooted in
principled policing.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
142

Methods Timing Critical behaviors supported
1, 2, 3
Supervisors routinely provide
feedback to patrol officers
regarding procedural justice
and police legitimacy.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Recognize PCPD officers who
are effectively implementing
procedural justice principles
during departmental
meetings.
Monthly 1, 2, 3
Rewarding
Recommend officers for unit-
level commendations for
compliance with critical
behaviors and required
drivers.
Quarterly 1, 2, 3
Monitoring
Identify incomplete training
requirements and contact
responsible party to
complete training.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Supervisors assess
performance of subordinates
with frequent check-ins to
monitor procedural justice
application and make
adjustments if results do not
match standards or
expectations.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3

Organizational Support
The PCPD command staff and department leaders will be essential in reinforcing,
encouraging, rewarding, and monitoring the critical behaviors. To ensure the drivers listed in
Table 45 are implemented, several organizational factors must be considered a prerequisite. First,
PCPD must have published policies and standards that empower PCPD officers to use procedural
justice principles as the standard for principle policing. These policies and measures must be
enforced to hold the organization accountable for accomplishing the set goals. Second, PCPD
143

command staff and department leaders must espouse the value of meeting the organizational
goals by ensuring congruency with policies and procedures. Finaly, department leaders should
create opportunities for feedback from junior officers to create ownership of organizational goals
and ensure their voices are being considered.
Level 2: Learning
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) describe Level 2 Learning as the state in which
participants acquire the intended knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and commitment.
Confidence and commitment were added to help close the gap between learning and behavior
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The correlation between learning and procedural justice
training will provide the attributes and tools for PCPD officers to facilitate a sustainable culture
change in which procedural justice aligns with professional standards, principled policing,
organizational goals, and improving the perception of police legitimacy.
Learning Goals
Learning goals have been created based on the recommendations identified in this
chapter. After procedural justice training, PCPD officers will be able to:
1. Remember and recall the principles of procedural justice.
2. Understand and explain the concepts of each principle.
3. Demonstrate, apply, and impliment procedural justice principles in training scenarios.
Use procedural justice principles to gain cooperation and improve perceptions of
police officers.
4. Analyze and examine investigations outcomes with and without the use of procedural
justice.
144

5. Observe and evaluate other PCPD officers use of procedural justice and provide
feedback as required.
6. Reflect, create, and initiate strategies to use procedural justice to improve community
relations.
Program
Continuous training resides as the center of gravity for all law enforcement professionals.
The PCPD maintains a robust training department that routinely designs and modifies training
curriculums to respond to an ever-changing profession. The goals listed in this chapter will be
met by mandating all officers attend and complete updated training on procedural justice and
principled policing. After the training, mentor PCPD rank and file regarding procedural justice
principles, application, and outcomes.
Declarative knowledge will be improved through a revised curriculum incorporating
Bloom’s Taxonomy. Procedural knowledge will be enhanced by interactive demonstrations,
practice, feedback, scaffolding, and reflection. Supervisors will meet with their subordinates to
provide mentorship and guidance on procedural justice applications, principled policing, and
professional standards. Additionally, supervisors will debrief subordinates and offer feedback
regarding their performance and accomplishment of the recommended goals. Motivation will
continue to be nurtured and improved as PCPD officers align their declarative and procedural
knowledge with their individual interests, perception of the utility, and perception of importance.
The updated procedural justice training curriculum will also highlight the internal value,
importance, and benefits of infusing procedural justice principles. Organizational cultural models
and settings will improve as command staff, and department leaders emulate the behaviors they
require of their peace officers. PCPD command staff and department leaders will lead by
145

example to show congruency with departmental policies, standards, and stated organizational
goals.
The second part of this recommendation is to mandate continuous procedural justice
training by working with the Western Region Commission (POST) to add procedural justice to
the continued professional training – perishable training program. This initiative should create a
standalone training on procedural justice accessed through depart training, workshops, and
computer-based training or learning management systems. All refresher training should include
knowledge checks, feedback, and clear objectives. Additionally, access to other training (implicit
bias, de-escalation, domestic violence) that incorporates procedural justice principles in their
curriculum should be available to earn credit or continued educational units toward procedural
justice recertification. Finally, to further reinforce the training objectives, the material presented
in the department training, workshops, and CBT/LMS platforms should be consistent across
departments and aligned with bulletin boards and social media posts.
Evaluation of the Components of Learning
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) define learning as the extent to which participants
obtain the intended knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and commitment to a program.
Therefore, intentional methods, tools, and techniques should be developed to evaluate learning.
Table 46 lists the methods and activities used to assess the declarative knowledge, procedural
skills, attitude, confidence, and commitment of PCPD officers involved in the mandated training.
Table 43 illustrates methods and timing evaluation.

146

Table 43
Evaluation of Components of Learning for the Program
Methods or activities Timing
Declarative knowledge: “I know it.”
Pre-test and post-test assessments Before and at the end of the
training
Knowledge checks using multiple-choice items related
to the principles of procedural justice

Knowledge checks through instruction
During training
Group share to demonstrate understanding of
principles. Officers discuss “what” is procedural
justice and “why” it is important to them and the
organization
During training
Procedural skills: “I can do it right now.”
Interactive scenarios depicting procedural knowledge
where students switch roles between a patrol officer
responding to a scenario and a trainer evaluating the
officers in the scenario
During training
Officers demonstrate knowledge of “how” and “when”
to implement procedural justice principles.
During training
Attitude: “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Module of instruction or workshop discussion
highlighting community benefits of using procedural
justice principles
During training
Module of instruction or workshop discussion
highlighting occupational benefits of using
procedural justice principles
During training
Likert-scale survey questions completed by the
participating officers at the end of training
End of training
Confidence: “I think I can do it on the job.”
Discussion: participating officers use self-reflection to
reinforce what they learned and how they will teach
it to others.
During training
Likert-scale survey questions completed by the
participating officers at the end of the training
End of training
Commitment: “I will do it on the job.”
Continuous mentoring infusing procedural justice
principles into cultural modeling and cultural settings
On going
Likert-scale survey questions completed by the
participating officers at the end of the training
End of training
147

Level 1: Reaction
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) described reaction as the extent to which program
participants find the training session satisfactory, engaging, and helpful to their position. Level 1
consists of three components: engagement, relevance, and customer satisfaction (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). The goal of Level 1 is to effectively establish whether the instructor and
training program were effective or not (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Table 44 illustrates the
methods used to determine whether the participating PCPD officers find their procedural justice
training favorable, engaging, and relevant.

Table 44
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Active listening in presentation During training
Active interaction during scenarios and group
sharing activities
During training
Asking meaningful questions During training
Relevance
Monitoring of officers by instructors During training
Course evaluation survey End of training
Group discussion for relevance check During training
Customer Satisfaction
Instructors’ monitoring of officers During training
Course evaluation survey End of training

148

Evaluation Tools
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) suggest that the evaluation of a program’s impact
occurs immediately after its implementation as well as after a period of time. Kirkpatrick and
Kirkpatrick (2016) further recommend using a dual evaluation approach which includes using
immediate and delayed evaluation tools to assess effectiveness. Immediately after the program’s
implementation, the participating PCPD officers will be asked to participate in a post-course
evaluation to determine the program’s impact on participants’ knowledge, motivation, and
application of procedural justice.
Immediately Following the Program Implementation. The goal of conducting an
evaluation immediately after the program’s implementation is to assess Level 1 (customer
satisfaction, relevance, and engagement) and Level 2 (knowledge and motivation) outcomes
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). A course survey will be administered immediately after the
program’s training completion and will consist of Likert-scale questions. The proposed
evaluation tool can be found in Appendix D.
Delayed for a Period After the Program Implementation. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrich
(2016) also propose evaluating the impact of the program after a period of time since the
implementation. Postponing the evaluation allows participants to reflect on the program’s
content and the impact while providing time for the participant-learner to apply what they
learned from the instruction. A delayed survey will be sent out 45 days after the completion of
the initial training. The post-training evaluation will address Level 1 (reaction), Level 2
(learning), Level 3 (behavior), and Level 4 (results) outcomes (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
The information gathered from the evaluation survey will provide feedback on the program’s
149

effectiveness. The proposed evaluation tool that will be used 30 days after the training
completion can be found in Appendix E.
Summary of the Implementation and Evaluation
The recommendations to achieve the stakeholders and organizational goals were planned,
implemented, and evaluated using the Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) new world model. The
new world model offers a result-oriented framework that guides the creation of meaningful and
measurable indicators that begin on the first day of training to many months after the completion
of training (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Additionally, Kirkpatrick’s new world model is a
seamless evaluation partner to the Clark and Estes (2006) knowledge, motivation, and
organization gap analysis framework. As a result, Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training and
evaluation have been used to confirm that PCPD officers possess the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational support to effectively meet the need of the African American community while
building trust and police legitimacy.
To construct an effective implementation and evaluation plan, research was conducted to
determine where the gaps existed concerning PCPD officers’ knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences related to the organizational and stakeholder performance goals.
During the initial phase of the research, a Likert-scale survey and document analysis revealed
gaps in PCPD officers’ declarative and procedural knowledge, as well as their organizational
cultural model and setting influences. Open-ended questions at the end of the Likert-scale survey
confirmed the same. Consequently, recommendations were designed based on those influences
and barriers identified.
The Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick new world model (2016) was used to design the
implementation and evaluation plan by starting in reverse order with Level 4 Results. The
150

procedural justice training will be evaluated immediately following completed training to capture
Level 1 Reaction and Level 2 Learning results. Then, approximately 45 days after the completed
training, a blended evaluation will be used to capture Level 3 Behavior and Level 4 Results
outcomes. As a result of meeting the organizational and stakeholder goals, Kirkpatrick and
Kirkpatrick’s new world model may be the gold standard for all PCPD training.
Recommendations for Future Research
Recommendations for future research on this topic should initially focus on data
collection from other stakeholders, including PCPD command staff, PCPD training officers, and
the Pacific Coast African American community members. A more comprehensive and complete
gap analysis would be possible if the research expanded to the remaining stakeholders.
Another recommendation for future research should include more extensive sampling of
PCPD officers across neighborhoods and departments (Sheriff’s and Highway Patrol), as well as
police departments in other areas of the country. Expanding the sample size for future surveys
will enrich the researchers’ analysis and collection of data to reflect more prominent topics such
as; safeguarding communities, respecting and protecting rights, preserving the badge as a symbol
of trust, and reducing crime. Additionally, incorporating multiple police departments within the
United States can be one way to increase generalizability and bring awareness to the need for a
unified national standard for principled policing.
Conclusion
In 2021, the PCPD established an organizational goal: by December 2023, 100% of
PCPD sworn officers will have received extensive training on procedural justice principles. In
addition, the PCPD stakeholder goal required all sworn officers to demonstrate competence and
acceptance of procedural justice policing by July 2024. The effectiveness of this goal will be
151

measured by way of a 10% increase in the African American community’s support for their
police officers. This goal includes reductions in the areas of use of force to detain or arrest
subjects, filing complaints about unprofessional behavior or inappropriate treatment, and filing
civil liabilities claims for damage to property or person.
This study examined the knowledge, motivation, and organizational assets and needs of
PCPD police officers’ use and application of procedural justice principles. Using the Clark and
Estes (2008) framework to perform gap analysis produced the survey and the open-ended survey
questions data in this study. The data revealed the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
assets and needs related to PCPD use and application of procedural justice. Recommendations
focused on resolving each need and strengthening each asset with the help of the Kirkpatrick and
Kirkpatrick (2016) new world model. This model was used to enable PCPD leaders to effectively
implement the changes required to increase community trust and police legitimacy through the
use of procedural justice. Without the suggested changes, the PCPD use of procedural justice
applications may stay below desired thresholds. The suggested changes are a solution that can
improve PCPD officers’ performance while serving and protecting African American
communities.
This research was conducted because PCPD recognized a need to increase police
legitimacy and community trust and repair the African American community’s history of neglect
and abuse. Based on the literature review for this study, the divide between law enforcement and
the African American community continues to remain stagnant due to a national focus on
policing malpractice. Initial and continuing procedural justice education for PCPD police officers
requires police and community cooperation for development, delivery, and tracking. This
research should be used as a guide to start conversations to buld trust, as well as find safe and
152

healthy solutions for all communities in general, and for the African American community
specifically.
153

References
Abel, T. (2003). Understanding complex human ecosystems: The case of ecotourism on Bonaire.
Conservation Ecology, 7(3), Article 10. Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-00565-070310
Adams, K., Alpert, G. P., Dunham, R. G., Garner, J. H., Greenfeld, L. A., Henriquez, M. A.,
Langan, P. A., Maxwell, C. D., & Smith, S. K. (1999). Use of force by police: Overview
of national and local data. Department of Justice. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/bjs
Aguinis, H., & Kraiger, K. (2009). Benefits of training and development for individuals and
teams, organizations, and society. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 451–474.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163505
Alang, S., McAlpine, D., McCreedy, E., & Hardeman, R. (2017). Police brutality and black
health: Setting the agenda for public health scholars. American Journal of Public Health,
107(5), 662–665.
Alexander, M. (2012). The new jim crow: Mass incarceration in an age of color blindness. The
New Press.
Allison, L. (2019). Angela Davis, Policing the black man: Arrest, prosecution, and
imprisonment. Journal of African American Studies, 23(1-2), 142–145.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12111-019-09424-y
Amodio, D., & Ratner, K. (2011). A memory systems model of implicit social cognition.
Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(3), 143–148.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411408562
154

Amodio, D. M., & Mendoza, S. A. (2010). Implicit Intergroup bias: cognitive, affective, and
motivational underpinnings. Handbook of implicit social cognition: measurement, theory,
and applications. The Guilford Press.
Anderson, J. R. (2009). The architecture of cognition. Psychology Press.
Associated Press News. (2021). Death of George Floyd. https://apnews.com/hub/death-of-
george-floyd
Azevedo, R., & Aleven, V. (Eds.). (2013). International handbook of metacognition and
learning technologies (Vol. 26). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Springer.
Balko, R. (2013). Hod did America’s Police become a Military Force on the Streets. ABAJ, 99,
44.
Barlow, D. E., & Barlow, M. H. (1999). A political economy of community policing. Policing,
22(4), 646–674. https://doi.org/10.1108/13639519910299580
Barrett, K. J., Haberfeld, M. M., & Walker, M. C. (2009). A comparative study of the attitudes of
urban, suburban and rural police officers in New Jersey regarding the use of force. Crime,
law and social change, 52(2), 159–179.
Baynes, L. M. (2003). White out: The absence and stereotyping of people of color by broadcast
networks in prime-time entertainment programing. 45. Arizona Law Review, 293, 301–
318.
Bella, T. (2021, April 10). A black army officer held at gunpoint during traffic stop was afraid to
get out of his car. “you should be,” said police. The Washington Post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/04/10/virginia-police-gunpoint-army-
nazario/
155

Blair, I. V., Ma, J. E., & Lenton, A. P. (2001). Imagining stereotypes away: The moderation of
implicit stereotypes through mental imagery. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 81(5), 828–841. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.5.828
Bobula, K. A. (2011). This is your brain on bias. . . or, the neuroscience of bias. Clark College.
Bohonos, J. W. (2021). Critical race theory and working‐class White men: Exploring race
privilege and lower‐class work‐life. Gender, Work and Organization, 28(1), 54–66.
https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12512
Bradford, B. (2014). Policing and social identity: Procedural justice, inclusion and cooperation
between police and public. Policing and society, 24(1), 22–43.
Bradford, B., Murphy, K., & Jackson, J. (2014). Officers as mirrors: Policing, procedural justice
and the(re)production of social identity. British Journal of Criminology, 54(4), 527–550.
https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azu021
Bradford, B., & Quinton, P. (2014). Self-legitimacy, police culture and support for democratic
policing in an English constabulary. British Journal of Criminology, 54(6), 1023–1046.
https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azu053
Britton, N. J. (2000). Race and policing: A study of police custody. The British Journal of
Criminality, 40(4), 639–658.
Brown, C. (2017). Critical race theory. In M. Allen (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of
communication research methods (pp. 303–305). SAGE Publications.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483381411.n112
Brucato, B. (2014). Fabricating the color line in a white democracy: From slave catchers to petty
sovereigns. Theoria, 61(141), 30–54. https://doi.org/10.3167/th.2014.6114103
156

Bryson, J., Quick, K., Slotterback, C., & Crosby, B. (2012). Designing public participation
processes. Public Administration Review, 73(1), 23–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-
6210.2012.02678.x
Bueno Américo, H., Kowalski, M., Cardoso, F., Kunrath, C. A., González-Víllora, S., & Teoldo,
I. (2017). Difference in declarative tactical knowledge between U-11 and U-15 soccer
players. Human Movement, 18(5), 25–30. https://doi.org/10.1515/humo-2017-0045
Calábria-Lopes, M., Greco, P. J., & Pérez-Morales, J. C. (2019). Teaching games for
understanding in basketball camp: The impact on process and product performance.
[Teaching Games for Understanding en un campamento de baloncesto: impacto en el
rendimiento del proceso y del producto]. Revista Internacional de Ciencias del Deporte,
15(56), 209–224. https://doi.org/10.5232/ricyde2019.05606
Caliendo, M., Fossen, F., & Kritikos, A. (2012). Trust, positive reciprocity, and negative
reciprocity: Do these traits impact entrepreneurial dynamics? Journal of Economic
Psychology, 33(2), 394–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2011.01.005
Cashmore, E., & McLaughlin, E. (Eds.). (2013). Out of order?: Policing Black People.
Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203066287
Chaney, C., & Robertson, R. V. (2013). Racism and police brutality in America. Journal of
African American Studies, 17(4), 480–505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12111-013-9246-5
Cherney, A., & Chui, W. (2009). Policing ethnically and culturally diverse communities. Oxford
University Press.
Chiesi, H. L., Spilich, G. J., & Voss, J. F. (1979). Acquisition of domain-related information in
relation to high and low knowledge. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,
18, 257–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(79)90146-4
157

Chin, G. J., & Vernon, C. J. (2014). Reasonable but unconstitutional: Racial profiling and the
radical objectivity of Whren v. United States. George Washington Law Review, 83, 882–
942.
Chung, A. (2021). U.S. Supreme Court rejects case over “qualified immunity” for police.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-qualifiedimmunity/u-s-supreme-court-
rejects-case-over-qualified-immunity-for-police-IdUSKBN2B01L6.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Information Age Publishing.
Cohen, S. (2002). Folk devils and moral panics (3rd ed.). Routledge.
Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P. E. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: A meta-
analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86(2), 278–321.
https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.2001.2958
Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., & Ng, K. Y. (2001). Justice at
the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research.
The Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 425–445. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-
9010.86.3.425
Cooper, C. (1997). Patrol police officer conflict resolution processes. Journal of Criminal
Justice, 25(2), 87–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-2352(96)00053-0
Correll, J., & Ma, D. S. (2014). Target prototypicality moderates racial bias in the decision to
shoot. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(2), 391–396.
Crank, J. P. (2015). Understanding police culture. Oxon.
Creswell, J. W. (2008). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. SAGE Publications.
158

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Cromar, A. (2020). Police must do better: local chiefs, departments react to killing of George
Floyd. https://www.boston.com/news/local-news/2020/05/31/police-must-do-better-local-
chiefs-departments-react-to-killing-of-george-floyd/
Cropanzano, R., Weiss, H. M., Suckow, K. J., & Grandey, A. A. (2000). Doing justice to
workplace emotion. In N. M. Ashkanasy, C. E. Härtel & W. J. Zerbe (Eds.), Emotions in
the workplace: Research, theory, and practice (pp. 49–62). Quorum Books/Greenwood
Publishing Group.
Daly, K. (2015). What is restorative justice? Fresh answers to a vexed question. Victims &
Offenders, 11(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2015.1107797
Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments
examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin,
125, 627–668. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.627
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behavior. Plenum Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7
DeGue, S., Fowler, K. A., & Calkins, C. (2016). Deaths due to use of lethal force by law
enforcement: Findings from the national violent death reporting system, 17 U.S. States,
2009–2012. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 51(5), S173–S187.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2016.08.027
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2017). Critical race theory. New York University Press.
159

DeSilver, D., Lipka, M., & Fahmy, D. (2020). 10 things we know about race and policing in the
U.S. Pew Research Center. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-
tank/2020/06/03/10-things-we-know-about-race-and-policing-in-the-u-s/
Di Nota, P. M., & Huhta, J. M. (2019). Complex motor learning and police training: Applied,
cognitive, and clinical perspectives. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 1797.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01797
Donner, C., Maskaly, J., Fridell, L., & Jennings, W. G. (2015). Policing and procedural justice:
A state-of-the-art review. Policing, 38(1), 153–172. https://doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-12-
2014-0129
Donnor, J. K. (2021). White fear, White flight, the rules of racial standing and whiteness as
property: Why two critical race theory constructs are better than one. Educational Policy,
35(2), 259–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904820986772
Dulaney, W. M. (1996). Black police in America. Indiana University Press.
Durr, M. (2015). What is the difference between slave patrols and modern-day policing?
Institutional violence in a community of color. Critical Sociology, 41(6), 873–879.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0896920515594766
Duvernay, A. (Director). (2017). 13
TH
[film] Netflix.
Eberhardt, J. L. (2020). Biased: Uncovering the hidden prejudice that shapes what we see, think,
and do. Pinguin
Eccles, J. S. (2006). Expectancy value motivation theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of
Psychology. Institute for Social Research, 53, 109–132.
160

Edwards, F., Esposito, M. H., & Lee, H. (2018). Risk of police-involved death by race/ethnicity
and place, United States, 2012–2018. American Journal of Public Health, 108(9), 1241–
1248. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2018.304559
Ellicott, A. (2021). What are the different types of media? Axia Public Relations.
https://www.axiapr.com/blog/what-are-the-different-types-of-media
Fehr, E., & Gachter, S. (2000). Fairness and retaliation: The economics of reciprocity. The
Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14(3), 159–182. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.14.3.159
Fink, A. (2013). How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to
designing college courses. John Wiley & Sons.
Fontaine, J., Jannetta, J., & Paddock, E. (2017). Mistrust and ambivalence between residents and
police: evidence from four Chicago neighborhoods. The Urban Institute.
https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/92316/2017.07.31_legitimacy_brief
_finalized_2.pdf
Ford Foundation. (2020). Diversity, equity, and inclusion.
https://www.fordfoundation.org/about/people/diversity-equity-and-inclusion/
Foreman, T. (2021). Army lieutenant sues police for pepper spraying, threatening him during
stop. Army Times. https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2021/04/10/army-
lieutenant-sues-police-for-pepper-spraying-threatening-him-during-stop/
Fridell, L. (2013). This is not your grandparents’ prejudice: The implications of the modern
science of bias for police training. Translational Criminology, Fall, 10–11.
Fuller, P., & Murphy, M. (2020). The leader’s guide to unconscious bias: how to reframe bias.
cultivate connection and create high performing teams. Simon & Schuster.
161

Gallagher, C., Maguire, E., Mastrofski, S., & Reisig, M. 2001. The public image of the police.
Final report to The International Association of Chiefs of Police. Virginia, USA: The
Administration of Justice Program George Mason University, 1.
Gallimore, R. G., Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45–46.
Garland, D. (2008). On the concept of moral panic, in crime, media, culture. International
Journal, 4(1), 9–30.
Garrison, A. H. (2011). Disproportionate incarceration of African Americans: What history and
the first decade of the twenty-first century have brought. Journal of the Institute of
Justice & International Studies, 11(1), 87–116.
Giacomini, D. (2016). Accountability in Italian local governments: State of the art and future
perspective. In B. Cuadrado-Ballesteros & I. García Sánchez (Eds.), Local governments
in the digital era: Looking for accountability. Nova Publishers.
Giacomini, D., & Simonetto, A. (2020). How mayors perceive the influence of social media on
the policy cycle. Public Organization Review, 20(4), 735–752.
Gillooly, J. W. (2020). How 911 callers and call‐takers impact police encounters with the public:
The case of the Henry Louis Gates Jr. arrest. Criminology & Public Policy, 19(3), 787–
804.
Gilroy, P. (2008). The myth of black criminality. In B. Spalek (Ed.), Ethnicity and crime: A
reader (pp. 113–127). Open University Press.
162

Goff, P. A., & Kahn, K. B. (2012). Racial bias in policing: Why we know less than we should.
Social Issues and Policy Review, 6(1), 177–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-
2409.2011.01039.x
Golash-Boza, T. (2016). A critical and comprehensive sociological theory of race and racism.
Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 2(2), 129–141.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2332649216632242
Goldsmith, A. (2003). Policing weak states: Citizens safety and state responsibility. Policing and
Society, 13(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/1043946032000050553
Goldsmith, A. (2005). Police reform and the problem of trust. Theoretical Criminology, 9(4),
443–470. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480605057727
Goodman-Delahaunty, J. (2010). Four ingredients: New recipes for procedural justice in
Australian policing. Policing, 4(4), 403–410. https://doi.org/10.1093/police/paq041
Graham, A., Haner, M., Sloan, M. M., Cullen, F. T., Kulig, T. C., & Jonson, C. L. (2020). Race
and worrying about police brutality: The hidden injuries of minority status in America.
Victims & Offenders, 15(5), 549–573. https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2020.1767252
Greer, C., & McLaughlin, E. (2011). Trail by media: Policing, the 24-7 news mediasphere and
politics of outrage. Theoretical Criminology, 15(1), 23–46.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480610387461
Grimlich, J., & Parker, K. (2017). Most officers say the media treat police unfairly. Pew
Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/01/25/most-officers-say-
the-media-treat-police-unfairly/
163

Gupta, R., Duff, M. C., Denburg, N. L., Cohen, N. J., Bechara, A., & Tranel, D. (2009).
Declarative memory is critical for sustained advantageous complex decision-
making. Neuropsychologia, 47(7), 1686–1693.
Haas, N., Van Craen, M., Skogan, W. G., & Fleitas, D. (2015). Explaining officer compliance:
The importance of procedural justice and trust inside a police organization. Criminology
& Criminal Justice, 15(4), 442–463. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748895814566288
Hadden, S. E. (2003). Slave patrols: Law and violence in Virginia and the Carolinas. Harvard
University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1g809mv
Hahn, M. E., & Kellogg, R. T. (2018). Understanding how working memory capacity and
domain-specific knowledge influence memory performance. Journal of Expertise, 1(1),
42–56.
Hardin, R. (1993). The street-level epistemology of trust. Politics & Society, 21(4), 505–529.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329293021004006
Harris, D. A. (1999). DRIVING WHILE BLACK: RACIAL PROFILING ON OUR NATION’S
HIGHWAYS. American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved June 1999, from
https://www.aclu.org/report/driving-while-black-racial-profiling-our-nations-highways
Harris, L. (2019). Diversity beyond lip service: A coaching guide for challenging bias. Berrett-
Koehler.
Harrison, C. (2021). Managing and manipulating survey data: A beginner’s guide. Harvard
University. https://psr.iq.harvard.edu/book/managing-and-manipulating-survey-data-
beginners-guide
Hassan, J., & Noack, R. (2021, May 25). How George Floyd’s killing sparked a global
reckoning. The Washington Post.
164

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/05/25/george-floyd-anniversary-global-
change/
Hawkins, H., & Thomas, R. (1991). White policing of black populations: a history of race and
social control in America. Routledge Revivals.
Heaton, P. (2010). Hidden in Plain Sight What Cost-of-Crime Research Can Tell Us About
Investing in Police. RAND Corporation.
https://www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/OP279.html https://doi.org/10.7249/OP279
Helsen, W.F., & Starkes, J.L. (1999). A Multidimensional Approach to Skilled Perception and
Performance in Sport. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 1–27.
Hickman, M. J., Piquero, A. R., & Garner, J. H. (2008). Toward a national estimate of police use
of nonlethal force. Criminology & Public Policy, 7(4), 563–604.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2008.00528.x
Hill, E., Tiefenthaler, A., Triebert, C., Jordan, D., Willis, H., & Stein, R. (2020, May 31). How
George Floyd was killed in police custody. The New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/31/us/george-floyd-investigation.html
Holihen, K., Moe, C., Stamps, J., & Bradley, M. (2021). Procedural Justice: A Training Model
for Organizational-Level Change. International Association of Chiefs of Police.
https://www.policechiefmagazine.org/procedural-justice-a-training-model-for-
organizational-level-change/
Holland, D., & Quinn, N. (Eds.). (1987). Cultural models in language and thought. Cambridge
University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511607660
165

Hollander-Blumoff, R., & Tyler, T. R. (2008). Procedural justice in negotiations: Procedural
fairness, outcome acceptance, and integrative potential. Law & Social Inquiry, 33(2),
473–500. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4469.2008.00110.x
Horowitz, J. (2007). Making every encounter count: Building trust and confidence in the police.
National Institute of Justice Journal, 256(1), 8–11.
Horton, A. (2021, April 13). Police encounter with black army officer is a hurtful reminder that
service is not going to save you, veterans say. https://washingtonpost.com/national-
security/2021/04/13/carzon-nazario-black-veterans/
Houslohner, A. (2017, September 24). Three years after Ferguson, the same old concerns rise in
St. Louis protests. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/three-
years-after-ferguson-the-same-old-concerns-rise-in-st-louis-
protests/2017/09/24/c54f1d4c-9eea-11e7-9c8d-cf053ff30921_story.html
International Association of the Chiefs of Police. (2001). Police use of force in America 2001.
https://www.theiacp.org/sites/default/files/2018-08/2001useofforce.pdf
International Association of the Chiefs of Police. (2017). Annual report.
https://www.theiacp.org/sites/default/files/all/0-2/2017_IACP_Annual_Report.pdf
International Association of the Chiefs of Police. (2020). National consensus policy and
discussion paper on use of force. https://www.theiacp.org/sites/default/files/2020-
07/National_Consensus_Policy_On_Use_Of_Force%2007102020%20v3.pdf
Ives, M., & Cramer, M. (2021, April 10). Black army officer pepper-sprayed in traffic stop
accuses officers of assault. The New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/10/us/caron-nazario-windsor-police-virginia.html
Izard, C. E. (1977). Human emotions. Plenum. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2209-0
166

Jackson, J., & Bradford, B. (2010). What is trust and confidence in the police? Policing. Journal
of Policy Practice, 4(3), 241–248. https://doi.org/10.1093/police/paq020
Jackson, J., Bradford, B., Hough, M., Myhill, A., Quinton, P., & Tyler, T. R. (2012). Why do
people comply with the law? Legitimacy and the influence of legal institutions. British
Journal of Criminology, 52, 1051–1071. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azs032
Jann, W., & Wegrich, K. (2017). Theories of the policy cycle. In F. Fischer & G. J. Miller (Eds.),
Handbook of public policy analysis: Theory, politics and methods. (pp. 69–88).
Routledge.
Januta, A., Chung, A., & Hurley, L. (2020). Challenging police violence . . . while Black.
Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-police-immunity-race/
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2015). Educational research; Quantitative, qualitative,
and mixed approaches (5th ed.). SAGE.
Jones-Brown, D. (2007). Forever the symbolic assailant: The more things change, the more they
remain the same. Criminology & Public Policy, 6(1), 103–121.
Karma, R. (2020). Want to fix policing? Start with a better 911 system. Vox Media.
https://www.vox.com/2020/8/10/21340912/police-violence-911-emergency-call-tamir-
rice-cahoots
Kenyon, M. D. (2019). Rethinking procedural justice: Perceptions, attitudes, and framing.
International Association of Chiefs of Police.
https://www.policechiefmagazine.org/rethinking-procedural-justice/
Kim, M. E. (2021). Transformative justice and restorative justice: Gender-based violence and
alternative visions of justice in the United States. International Review of Victimology,
27(2), 162–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269758020970414
167

Kirkpatrick, J. D., Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Four levels of training evaluation. ATD Press.
Klijn, E. H., van Twist, M., van der Steen, M., & Jeffares, S. (2016). Public managers, media
influence, and governance: Three research traditions empirically explored.
Administration & Society, 48(9), 1036–1058. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399714527752
Kochel, T. R. (2018). Police legitimacy and resident cooperation in crime hotspots: effects of
victimization risk and collective efficacy. Policing and society, 28(3), 251–270.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 212–218.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2009). Methods of educational and social science research: The logic of
methods. Waveland Press.
Krehbiel, P. J., & Cropanzano, R. (2000). Procedural justice, outcome favorability, and emotion.
Social Justice Research, 13, 339–360. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007670909889
Krieger, N., Kiang, M. V., Chen, T. J., & Waterman, P. D. (2015). Trends in US deaths due to
legal intervention among black and white men, age 15–34 years, by county income level.
Harvard Public Health Review, 3(1), 1–5.
Kunard, L., & Moe, C. (2015). Procedural justice for law enforcement: An overview. U.S.
Department of Justice. https://ncjtc-static.fvtc.edu/Resources/RS00005936.pdf
Law Enforcement Best Practices: Lessons learned from the field. (2019, January).
Https://Cops.Usdoj.Gov/Ric/Publications/Cops-W0875-Pub.Pdf.
https://cops.usdoj.gov/ric/Publications/cops-w0875-pub.pdf
Lacoe, J., & Stein, J. (2018). Exploring the policy implications of high-profile police violence.
Criminology & Public Policy, 17(4), 859–863. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12410
PCPD. (2020). Full reference masked in order to protect the participants identity.
168

Launspach, S. (2008). The role of talk in small writing groups: Building declarative and
procedural knowledge for basic writers. Journal of Basic Writing, 27(2), 56–80.
https://doi.org/10.37514/JBW-J.2008.27.2.04
Lee, C. (2004). But I thought he had a gun-race and police use of a deadly force. Hastings Race
& Poverty LJ, 2, 1.
Lersch, K. M., & Mieczkowski, T. (2004). Violent police behavior: Past, present, and future
research directions. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 10(1), 552–568.
Lett, E., Asabor, E. N., Corbin, T., & Boatright, D. (2020). Racial inequity in fatal US police
shootings, 2015–2020. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 754, 394–397. .
https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2020-215097
Lewis, L. K. (2011). Organizational change: Creating change through strategic communication.
Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444340372
Lhamon, C. E., Goodson, P. T., Adegbile, D. P., Heriot, G., Kirsanow, P. N., Kladney, D.,
Narasaki, K. K., & Yaki, M. (2018). Lhamon, C. E. (2018). Police use of force: An
examination of modern policing practice. U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
https://www.usccr.gov/pubs/2018/11-15-Police-Force.pdf
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. Springer Science
& Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2115-4
Lister, M., Dovey, J., Giddings, S., Grant, I., & Kelly, K. (2008). New media: A critical
introduction. Routledge.
Loewen, J. W. (2008). Lies my teacher told me: Everything your American history textbook got
wrong. The New Press.
169

Long, L. J. (2018). Perpetual suspects: a critical race theory of Black and mixed-race
experiences of policing. Springer. Long, L. J. (20210. The ideal victim: a critical race
theory approach. International Review of Victimology. Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0269758021993339
Lyle, P., & Esmail, A. M. (2016). Sworn to protect: Police brutality – a dilemma for America’s
police. Race, Gender, & Class, 23(3), 155–185.
Lyons, W. (2002). Partnerships in formation and public safety: Community policing in a time of
terror. Policing, 25(1), 530–542. https://doi.org/10.1108/13639510210437023
MacCoun, R. J. (2005). Voice, control, and belonging: The double-edge sword of procedural
fairness. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 1, 171–201.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.1.041604.115958
MacLean, C. E. (2012). Improving African American confidence in law enforcement: Recruit to
optimize procedural justice, not racial quotas. International Journal of Police Science &
Management, 23(2), 102–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461355720974698
Maclin, T. (2019). Cops and cars: How the automobile drove Fourth Amendment law. Boston
University Law Review, 99(2317), 2347–2349.
Mailer, N. (2016). Miami and the siege of Chicago: An informal history of the Republican and
Democratic Conventions of 1968. Random House.
Mastrofski, S. D. (2012). Race, policing, and equity. Criminology & Public Policy, 11(4), 593–
600.
Mawby, R. I. (1999). Policing across the world: Issues for the twenty-first century. UCL press.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. SAGE Publications.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Pearson Education.
170

Mayo, A. M. (2015). Psychometric instrumentation: Reliability and validity of instrument used
for clinical practice, evidence-based practice projects and research studies. Clinical Nurse
Specialist CNS, 29(3), 134–138. https://doi.org/10.1097/NUR.0000000000000131
Mazerolle, L., Bennett, S., Davis, J., Sargeant, E., & Manning, M. (2013). Legitimacy in
policing: A systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 9(1), i–147.
https://doi.org/10.4073/csr.2013.1
Mazerolle, L., Sargeant, E., Cherney, A., Bennett, S., Murphy, K. Antobus., & Martin, P. (2014).
Procedural justice and legitimacy in policing. Springer.
Mentel, Z. (2012). Racial reconciliation, truth telling, and police legitimacy. Department of
Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.
Mertens, D., & Ginsberg, P. (2009). The handbook of social ethics. SAGE Publications.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483348971
Mishler, W., & Rose, R. (2001). What are the origins of political trust? Testing institutional and
cultural theories in post-communist societies. Comparative Political Studies, 34(1), 30–
62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414001034001002
Moore, M. H. (2002). Recognizing value in policing: The challenge of measuring police
performance. Police Executive Research Forum.
Murphy, K., & Cherney, A. (2011). Fostering cooperation with the police: How do ethnic
minorities in Australia respond to procedural justice-based policing? Australian and New
Zealand Journal of Criminology, 44(2), 235–257.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0004865811405260
171

Muzaffar, M. (2021). Anger as police beat Native American man and kill his dog on camera.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/bishop-native-american-dog-police-
b1892718.html
Nagin, D., & Telep, C. (2017). Procedural justice and legal compliance. Annual Review of Law
and Social Science, 13(1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110316-
113310
National Institute of Justice. (2019). Overview of Police Use of Force.
https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/overview-police-use-force#noteReferrer1
National Research Council. (2004). Fairness and effectiveness in policing: The evidence.
National Academies Press.
Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization
Science, 5(1), 14–37. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.5.1.14
O’Brien, T. C., Meares, T. L., & Tyler, T. R. (2020). Reconciling police and communities with
apologies, acknowledgements, or both: A controlled experiment. Annal of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science, 687(1), 202–215.
DOI:10.1177/0002716220904659
Owens, E., Weisburd, D., Amendola, K. L., & Alpert, G. P. (2018). Can you build a better cop?:
Experimental evidence on supervision, training, and policing, in the community.
Criminology & Public Policy, 17(1), 41–87. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12337
Owusu-Bempah, A. (2017). Race and policing in historical context: Dehumanizing and policing
of black people in the 21
st
century. Theoretical Criminology, 21(1), 23–34.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480616677493
172

Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-
theory
Paoline, E. A., III. (2004). Shedding light on police culture: An examination of officers’
occupational attitudes. Police Quarterly, 7(2), 205–236.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1098611103257074
Patton, V. K. (2008). Black subjects re-forming the past through the neo-slave narrative
tradition. MFS Modern Fiction Studies, 54(4), 877–883.
Peffley, M., & Hurwitz, J. (2007). Persuasion and resistance: Race and the death penalty in
America. American Journal of Political Science, 51(4), 996–1012.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2007.00293.x
Peirson, G. W. (1978). Introductory study of institutional racism in police law enforcement. U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.
Peyton, K., Sierra-Arevalo, M., & Rand, D. G. (2019). A field experiment on community
policing and police legitimacy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the
United States of America, 116(40), 19894–19898.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1910157116
Pintrich, P., & Schunk, D. (1996). Motivation in education: Theory, research and applications.
Merrill.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of a student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
Poole, S. M., Grier, S. A., Thomas, K. D., Sobande, F., Ekpo, A. E., Torres, L. T., Addington, L.
A., Weekes-Laidlow, M., & Henderson, G. R. (2021). Operationalizing critical race
173

theory in the marketplace. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 40(2), 126–142.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0743915620964114
Porter, R. E. (1995). The history of policing in the United States. In: Bailey WG (ed.) The
Encyclopedia of Police Science (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Garland Press, 114.
Premkumar, D., Gumbs, A., McConville, S., & Hsia, R. (2021). Police use of force and
misconduct in california. Public Policy Institute of California.
htpps://www.ppic.org/publication/police-use-of-force-and-misconduct-in-california/
President’s Task Force on 21
st
Century Policing. (2015). Final report of the president’s task
force on 21
st
century policing. Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.
Pretty, G. H., & Seligman, C. (1984). Affect and the over justification effect. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 1241–1253. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-
3514.46.6.1241
Pryce, D., & Whitaker, I. (2022). The Role of Procedural Justice in Policing: A Qualitative
Assessment of African Americans’ Perceptions and Experiences in a Large U.S. City. Du
Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race, 1–21.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X22000066
Qualtrics XM. (2020). What is ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) and what can I use it for?
Experience Management.
Quattlebaum, M., Meares, T., Tyler, T. (2018). Principles of procedurally just policing. The
Justice Collaboratory at Yale Law School.
Reeve, J., Cole, S. G., & Olson, B. C. (1986). Adding excitement to intrinsic motivation
research. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 1, 349–363.
174

Reidy, J. P. (1997). Worse than slavery: Parchman Farm and the ordeal of Jim Crow justice. The
Journal of Negro History, 82(2), 263–264. https://doi.org/10.2307/2717522
Reisig, M., McCluskey, J., Mastrofski, S., & Terrill, W. (2004). Suspect disrespect towards
police. Justice Quarterly, 21(2), 241–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820400095801
Remsberg, C. (2019). How “dispatch priming” can drive some disastrous shooting decisions.
Force Science. https://www.forcescience.com/2019/01/how-dispatch-priming-can-drive-
some-disastrous-shooting-decisions/
Rengifo, A. F., & Fratello, J. (2015). Perceptions of the police by immigrant youth: Looking at
stop-and-frisk and beyond using a New York City sample. Youth Violence and Juvenile
Justice, 13(4), 409–427. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541204014547591
Rios, V. M. (2011). Punished: Policing the lives of black and Latino boys. New York University
Press.
Robertson, R. V., & Chaney, C. D. (2019). Police use of excessive force against African
Americans: Historical antecedents and community perceptions (Policing perspectives
and challenges in the twenty-first century). Lexington Books.
Robinson, M. A. (2017). Black bodies in the ground: Policing disparities in the African
American community: An analysis of newsprint from January 1, 2015 through December
31, 2015. Journal of Black Studies, 48(6), 551–571.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0021934717702134
Robinson, S. B., & Leonard, K. F. (2019). Designing quality survey questions. SAGE
Publications. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
Robinson-Kurpius, S. E., & Stafford, M. E. (2006). Testing and measurement: A user friendly
guide. SAGE.
175

Roper, W. (2020). Black Americans 2.5X More Likely Than Whites to Be Killed By Police.
Statista. https://www.statista.com/chart/21872/map-of-police-violence-against-black-
americans/
Ross, C. T. (2015). A multi-level Bayesian analysis of racial bias in police shootings at the
county level in the United States. PLoS One, 10(11), Article e0141854.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0141854
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. Teachers College Press.
Rushin, S., & Edwards, G. (2021). An empirical assessment of pretextual stops and racial
profiling. Stanford Law Review, 73, 627–726.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and
new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54–67.
https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
Salkind, N., & Frey, B. (2017). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics (7th ed.).
SAGE Publications, Inc.
Salkind, N. J. (2014). 100 questions (and answers) about statistics. SAGE Publications.
Sanger, M. A., Buns, M. T., & Thomas, K. T. (2019). The effect of virtual training on speed and
accuracy of decision making in sport. Journal of Human Kinetics, 70, 261–273.
https://doi.org/10.2478/hukin-2019-0041
Santos-Longhurst, A. (2019). Intrinsic motivation examples. Healthline.
https://www.healthline.com/health/intrinsic-motivation#examples
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (Vol. 2). John Wiley & Sons.
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-proccessing-theory/
176

Schraw, G. (2009). A conceptual analysis of five measures of metacognitive
monitoring. Metacognition and learning, 4(1), 33–45.
Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. L. (2008). Motivation in Education: Theory,
Research and Applications (3rd ed.). Pearson.
Seattle Police Department. (2019). Seattle Police Department Manual.
https://www.seattle.gov/police-manual/title-8---use-of-force/8100---de-escalation
Sierra-Arevalo, M. (2020). Police, culture, and inequality. American Sociological Association,
48(4), 5–7.
Skogan, W. G. (2006). Asymmetry in the impact encounters with police. Policing and Society,
16(2), 99–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/10439460600662098
Skogan, W. G., Van Craen, M., & Hennessy, C. (2015). Training police for procedural justice.
Journal of Experimental Criminology, 11(3), 319–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-
014-9223-6
Smith, D. (2002). The theory heard around the world. American Psychological Association,
33(9), 30–33.
Smith, E. R., & DeCoster, J. (2000). Dual-process models in social and cognitive psychology:
Conceptual integration and links to underlying memory systems. Personality and Social
Psychology Review, 4(2), 108–131. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0402_01
Smith, W. A., Allen, W. R., & Danley, L. L. (2007). Assume the position… you fit the
description: Psychological experiences and racial battle fatigue among African American
male college students. The American Behavioral Scientist, 51(4), 551–578.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764207307742
177

Statista Research Department. (2020). Number of people shot to death by the police in the United
States from 2017 to 2021, by race. Statista.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race/
Sunshine, J., & Tyler, T. (2003). The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in shaping public
support for policing. Law & Society Review, 37(3), 513–548.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5893.3703002
Suranovic, S. (2001). Positive reciprocity. International Trade Theory and Policy.
http://internationalecon.com/Trade/Tch125/T125-7.php
Takei, C. (2020). How police can stop being weaponized by bias-motivated 911 calls. American
Civil Liberties Union. https://www.aclu.org/print/node/68772
Tate, J., Jenkins, J., & Rich, S. (2021). Fatal Force: 992 people have been shot and killed by
police in the past year. The Washington Post.
Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: a psychological analysis.
Tillyer, R., & Engel, R. S. (2013). The Impact of Drivers’ Race, Gender, and Age During Traffic
Stops: Assessing Interaction Terms and the Social Conditioning Model. Crime &
Delinquency, 59(3), 369–395. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128710389583
Thomas, D. J. (2017). Law enforcement must regain the public’s trust. National Police
Foundation. https://www.policefoundation.org/law-enforcement-must-regain-the-publics-
trust/
Tolliver, W. F., Hadden, B. R., Snowden, F., & Brown-Manning, R. (2016). Police killings of
unarmed black people: Centering race and racism in human behavior and the social
environment content. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 26(3-4),
279–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/10911359.2015.1125207
178

Trottier, D. (2015). Open-source intelligence, social media and law enforcement: Visions,
constraints and critiques. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 18(4-5), 530–547.
Tuckman, A. (2009). More attention, less deficit: Success strategies for adults with ADHD.
Specialty Press.
Tyler, T. R. (1990). Why people obey the law. Yale University Press.
Tyler, T. R. (2001). A psychological perspective on the legitimacy of institutions and authorities:
The psychology of legitimacy. Cambridge University.
Tyler, T. R. (2003). Procedural justice, legitimacy, and the effectiveness rule of law. Crime and
Justice: A review of Research. University of Chicago Press.
Tyler, T. R. (2004). Enhancing police legitimacy. The Annals of the American Academy of
Political and Social Science, 593, 84–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716203262627
Tyler, T. R. (2006). Why People Obey the Law. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Tyler, T. R. (2008). Procedural justice and the courts. Court Review, 44, 25–31.
Tyler, T. R. (2017). Procedural justice and policing: A rush to judgement? Annual Review of Law
and Social Science, 13, 29–53. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110316-
113318
Tyler, T. R. (2021). Why people obey the law. Princeton University Press.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1j66769.13
Tyler, T. R., & Fagan, J. (2008). Legitimacy and cooperation: Why do people help the police
fight crime in their communities? Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 6, 231–275.
Tyler, T. R., Goff, P. A., & MacCoun, R. J. (2015). The impact of psychological science on
policing in the United States: Procedural justice, legitimacy, and effective law
179

enforcement. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 16(3), 75–109.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100615617791
Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. J. (2002). Trust in the law. Russell Sage.
Tyler, T. R., & Jackson, J. (2014). Popular legitimacy and the exercise of legal authority:
Motivating compliance, cooperation, and engagement. Psychology, Public Policy, and
Law, 20(1), 78–95. DOI:10.1037/a0034514
Tyler, T. R., Schulhofer, S., & Huq, A. Z. (2010). Legitimacy and deterrence effects in
counterterrorism policing: A study of Muslim Americans. Law & Society Review, 44(2),
365–402. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5893.2010.00405.x
Tyler, T. R., & Yuen, J. H. (2002). Trust in the law: Encouraging public cooperation with the
police and courts. Russell Sage Foundation.
U.S. Department of Justice. (2013). Office of justice programs, national institute of justice
annual report. https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/248568.pdf
U.S. Department of Justice. (2020). Addressing police misconduct laws enforced by the
department of justice. https://www.justice.gov/crt/addressing-police-misconduct-laws-
enforced-department-justice
Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. In M.
P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 29, pp. 271–360).
Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60019-2
Van Craen, M. (2013). Explaining majority and minority trust in the police. Justice Quarterly,
30(6), 1042–1067. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2011.649295
180

Van Craen, M. (2016a). Understanding police officers’ trust and trustworthy behavior: A work
relations framework. European Journal of Criminology, 13(2), 274–294.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370815617187
Van Craen, M. (2016b). Fair policing from the inside out. In M. Deflen (Ed.), The politics of
policing: Between force and legitimacy (pp. 3–19). Emerald Group Publishing
https://doi.org/10.1108/S1521-613620160000021001
Voigt, R., Camp, N. P., Prabhakaran, V., Hamilton, W. L., Hetey, R. C., Griffiths, C. M.,
Jurgens, D., Jurafsky, D., & Eberhardt, J. L. (2017). Language from police body camera
footage shows racial disparities in officer respect. Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences of the United States of America, 114(25), 6521–6526.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1702413114
Walker, S. (2016). Governing the American police: Wrestling with the problems of democracy.
The University of Chicago. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol2016/iss1/15/
Ware, L. B., Collins, K. L., Hawley, J. B., & Ahima, R. S. (2020). A deliberate path toward
diversity, equity, and inclusion within the ASCI. The Journal of Clinical Investigation,
130(10), 5031–5032. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI142423
Warren, J. E. (2021, April 15). Black males and police encounters. Voice and Viewpoint.
https://sdvoice.info/black-males-and-police-encounters/
Warner, C., & McCarthy, J. D. (2014). Whatever can go wrong will: situational complexity and
public order policing. Policing and Society, 24(5), 566–587.
Washington Post. (2021). 987 people have been shot and killed by police in the past year.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/investigations/police-shootings-database/
181

Weiss, H. M., Suckow, K., & Cropanzano, R. (1999). Effects of justice conditions on discrete
emotions. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 786–794.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.84.5.786
Weitzer, R. (2000). Racialized policing: Residents’ perceptions in three neighborhoods. Law &
Society Review, 34(1), 129–155. https://doi.org/10.2307/3115118
Weitzer, R., & Tuch, S. A. (2006). Race and policing in America: Conflict and reform.
Cambridge University Press.
Wetzel, T. (2012, May 16). Corrections and politics: Why officers should stay neutral.
Corrections1. https://www.corrections1.com/jail-management/articles/corrections-and-
politics-why-officers-should-stay-neutral-wHisXUGwOv9kntej/
Wheeler, D., & Sillanpaa, M. (1998). Including the stakeholders: The business case. Long Range
Planning, 31(2), 201–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-6301(98)00004-1
White, C., Hogan, M., Shelley, T., & Unnithan, N. P. (2018). The influence of procedural justice
on citizen satisfaction with state law enforcement. Policing, 41(6), 687–703.
libproxy1.usc.edu/. https://doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-02-2017-0026
White House. (2001). Memorandum for the attorney general on racial profiling.
www.whitehouse.gov/news/release/2001/02/20010228-1
Wigfield, A., & Cambria, J. (2010). Students’ achievement values, goal orientations, and
interest: Definitions, development, and relations to achievement
outcomes. Developmental review, 30(1), 1–35.
Williams, E., & Cockcroft, T. (2018). Knowledge wars: Professionalization, organizational
justice and competing knowledge paradigms in British policing. In R. J. Mitchell & L.
Huey (Eds.), Evidence-based policing: An introduction (pp. 131–142). Policy Press.
182

Williams, K. (2015). Our enemies in blue: Police and power in America. AK Press.
Wood, G., Tyler, T. R., & Papachristos, A. V. (2020). Procedural justice training reduces police
use of force and complaints against officers. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences of the United States of America, 117(18), 9815–9821.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1920671117
Worden, R. E., & McLean, S. J. (2017). Research on police legitimacy: the state of the art.
Policing: an international journal, 40(3), 480–513. https://doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-05-
2017-0062
Yildiz, E. (2014). A study on the relationship between organizational culture and organizational
performance and a model suggestion. International Journal of Research in Business and
Social Science, 3(4), 52–67.
Young, J. (2009). Moral panic: Its origins in resistance, ressentiment and the translation of
fantasy into reality. British Journal of Criminology, 49(1), 4–16.
https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azn074
Zapata-Phelan, C., Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & Livingston, B. (2009). Procedural justice,
interactional justice, and task performance: The mediating role of intrinsic motivation.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108(1), 93–105.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.08.001

183

Appendix A: Survey Alignment
Two research questions guided this study:
1. What are officer’s knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences that
support or hinder patrol officer’s use of procedural justice while serving and
protecting the African American community?
2. What recommendations will address the gaps in knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences that negatively impact an officer’s ability to utilize
procedural justice philosophies?

Table A1
Survey Questions
Question Open
or
closed
Level of
measurement
(nominal,
ordinal,
interval, ratio)
Response
options (if
closed-ended)
RQ Concept being
measured
(from
emerging
conceptual
framework)
Do you consent to
taking this survey?
Closed N/A Yes
No
N/A N/A
Which of the following
best describes you?

Closed Nominal Male

Female

Gender Non-
binary

Prefer not to say

Prefer to self-
describe below
N/A Demographic
Which of the following
best describes you?

Closed Nominal Asian

Black/African
American

N/A Demographic
184

Question Open
or
closed
Level of
measurement
(nominal,
ordinal,
interval, ratio)
Response
options (if
closed-ended)
RQ Concept being
measured
(from
emerging
conceptual
framework)
Caucasian/White

Hispanic/Latinx

Native
American

Pacific Islander

Prefer not to
respond

Prefer to self-
describe below
Which age category are
you in?

Open Nominal 20s

30s

40s

50s

60+
N/A Demographic
How long have you
served as a police
officer?

Open Nominal Less than 5
years

5–10 years

11–15 years

16-20 YEARS

21–25 years

26-30 years

31+ years
N/A Demographic
What is your rank?

Open Nominal Patrol officer

Detective
N/A Demographic
185

Question Open
or
closed
Level of
measurement
(nominal,
ordinal,
interval, ratio)
Response
options (if
closed-ended)
RQ Concept being
measured
(from
emerging
conceptual
framework)

Sergeant

Other
What is your highest
level of education
completed?

Closed Ordinal High school or
GED equivalent

Associates

Bachelors

Masters

Doctoral
N/A Demographic
Procedural justice focuses on the way police interact with the public, and how the perception
of those interactions shape the public’s views of the police and their willingness to obey the
law.
What is your
understanding of
procedural justice
principles (select all
that apply).

Closed Ordinal Treating others
with dignity and
respect

Conveying
trustworthy
motives

Providing others
a voice for input

Maintaining
neutrality

I am unfamiliar
with procedural
justice principles
1, 2 Knowledge
My level of confidence
with procedural justice
concepts is high

Closed Ordinal Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

1, 2 Knowledge
186

Question Open
or
closed
Level of
measurement
(nominal,
ordinal,
interval, ratio)
Response
options (if
closed-ended)
RQ Concept being
measured
(from
emerging
conceptual
framework)
Strongly
disagree
procedural justice
principles are
important in regard to
improving community
relations.

Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Knowledge
Procedural justice
principles may apply
to (select all that
apply):

Closed Nominal Improving
community
support

Increasing
police
legitimacy

Decreasing
forceful
outcomes

Decreasing use
of force
complaints

None of the
above
1, 2 Knowledge
I understand how to
apply procedural
justice principles.

Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Knowledge
I am confident I
received the proper
amount of procedural
justice training to do
Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

1, 2 Knowledge
187

Question Open
or
closed
Level of
measurement
(nominal,
ordinal,
interval, ratio)
Response
options (if
closed-ended)
RQ Concept being
measured
(from
emerging
conceptual
framework)
my job.

Disagree

Strongly
disagree

Never received
training
It is possible to
implement procedural
justice while on duty.
Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Knowledge
I have a positive opinion
of the use of
procedural justice.

Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Motivation
I find the procedural
justice principle
“showing dignity and
respect” useful while
performing my duties.

Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Motivation
I find the procedural
justice principle
“maintaining
neutrality” useful
while performing my
duties.

Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree

1, 2 Motivation
188

Question Open
or
closed
Level of
measurement
(nominal,
ordinal,
interval, ratio)
Response
options (if
closed-ended)
RQ Concept being
measured
(from
emerging
conceptual
framework)
I find the procedural
justice principle
“giving the subject a
voice” useful while
performing my duties.

Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Motivation
I find the procedural
justice principle
“maintaining
trustworthiness” useful
while performing my
duties.

Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Motivation
When practicable there
is value in utilizing
procedural justice
during my interactions
with the public
Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Motivation
Using procedural justice
during my routine
encounters with the
public has benefits to
the building of public
trust

Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Motivation
I have had positive
experiences with using
procedural justice
while on duty.

Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Motivation
189

Question Open
or
closed
Level of
measurement
(nominal,
ordinal,
interval, ratio)
Response
options (if
closed-ended)
RQ Concept being
measured
(from
emerging
conceptual
framework)
Using procedural justice
makes my job easier.

Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Motivation
Police legitimacy is: Closed Ordinal The actions of
the police that
fall within the
law

The actions of
the police are
always rooted in
the motto “to
serve and
protect”

The perception
by the
community that
the police are in
charge

Away to
increase
voluntary
compliance
1, 2 Motivation
Procedural justice is
important to my future
goals in policing?

Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree

1, 2 Motivation
190

Question Open
or
closed
Level of
measurement
(nominal,
ordinal,
interval, ratio)
Response
options (if
closed-ended)
RQ Concept being
measured
(from
emerging
conceptual
framework)
I have positive
experiences with using
procedural justice
within my
organization.
Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Organization
Procedural justice is
embraced internally up
and down the chain of
command

Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Organization
My organization
leadership encourages
and supports the use of
procedural justice,
even if it means taking
more time at every
radio call.

Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Organization
My peers encourage me
to use procedural
justice principles.
Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Organization
My supervisors
encourage me to use
procedural justice
principles.

Closed Ordinal Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Organization
191

Question Open
or
closed
Level of
measurement
(nominal,
ordinal,
interval, ratio)
Response
options (if
closed-ended)
RQ Concept being
measured
(from
emerging
conceptual
framework)
My organization shows
commitment to an
internal procedural just
environment.

Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Organization
My organizational
leaders set a good
example for the use of
procedural justice.
Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Organization
My organization is
committed to
achieving police
legitimacy through
procedural justice.
Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Organization
There are no significant
organizational barriers
that prevent me from
using procedural
justice.

Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Organization
My organization
maintains a policy or
policies that support
procedural justice

Closed Ordinal Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1, 2 Organization
192

Question Open
or
closed
Level of
measurement
(nominal,
ordinal,
interval, ratio)
Response
options (if
closed-ended)
RQ Concept being
measured
(from
emerging
conceptual
framework)
How can procedural
justice be better
implemented
throughout the
department?

Open Nominal Open 1, 2 KMO
What immediate actions
can be taken to
improve police
relationships in
communities of color?
Open Nominal Open 1, 2 KMO
What can leaders do to
help improve retention
in your department?

Open Nominal Open 1, 2 KMO
Are there any other
thoughts or additional
comments from
previous questions you
would like to add for
consideration?

Open Nominal Open 1, 2 KMO

193

Appendix B: Survey Protocols
Administrative
1. Do you consent to taking this survey?

2. What area of the country do you reside?

3. Are you male or Female?

Yes
No
North
South
East
West
Male
Female
Gender Non-binary
Other
Decline to answer
194

4. What is your ethnicity?

5. Which age category are you in?

African
Arabic
Asian
Black or African American
Caribbean
Hispanic, Latin X, or Spanish origin
Native American Indian or Alaskan Native
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
White non Hispanic or European origin
Mixed race
Unknown
Other
Decline to answer
20s
30s
40s
50+
195

6. How long have you served as a police officer?

7. What is your rank?

8. What is your highest level of education completed?

Less than 5 years
5-10 years
11-20 years
20-30 years
31+ years
Patrol Officer
Sargent
Detective
Senior Leader (Lieutenant or above)
High School or GED equivalent
Associates Degree
Bachelors Degree
Masters Degree
Doctorates Dgree (PhD, EdD, JD, MD, etc.)
196

Procedural justice focuses on the way police interact with the public, and how the perception of
those interactions shape the public’s views of the police and their willingness to obey the law.
Knowledge
9. What is your understanding of procedural justice principles (select all that apply).

10. My level of confidence with procedural justice concepts is high

11. Procedural justice principles are importance in improving community relations.

Treating others with dignity and respect
Conveying trustworthy motives
Providing others a voice for input
Maintaining neutrality
I am unfamiliar with procedural justice principles
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
197

12. Procedural justice principles may apply to (select all that apply):

13. I understand how to apply procedural justice principles.

14. I am confident I received the proper amount of procedural justice training to enable me to
meet my department expectations.

Improving community support
Increasing police legitimacy
Decreasing forceful outcomes
Decreasing use of force complaints
None of the above
198

15. It is possible to implement procedural justice while on duty.

Motivation
16. I have a positive opinion of the use of procedural justice.

17. I find the procedural justice principle “showing dignity and respect” useful while performing
my duties.

199

18. I find the procedural justice principle “maintaining neutrality” useful while performing my
duties.

19. I find the procedural justice principle “giving the subject a voice” useful while performing
my duties.

20. I find the procedural justice principle “maintaining trustworthiness” useful while performing
my duties.

200

21. When practicable, there is value in utilizing procedural justice during my interactions with
the public

22. Using procedural justice during my routine encounters with the public has benefits to the
building of public trust.

23. I have had positive experiences with using procedural justice while on duty.

201

24. Using procedural justice makes my job easier.

25. Police legitimacy is:

26. Procedural justice is important to my future goals in policing?

Organization
27. I have positive experiences with using procedural justice within my organization.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
202

28. Procedural justice is embraced internally up and down the chain of command

29. My organization leadership encourage and supports the use of procedural justice, even if it
means taking more time at every radio call.

30. My peers encourage me to use procedural justice principles.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
203

31. My supervisors encourage me to use procedural justice.

32. My organization shows commitment to an internal procedural just environment.

33. My organizational leaders set a good example for the use of procedural justice.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
204

34. My organization is committed to achieving police legitimacy through procedural justice.

35. There are no significant organizational barriers that prevent me from using procedural
justice.

36. My immediate supervisor provides procedural justice guidance (tactical execution).

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
205

37. My immediate supervisor provides procedural justice mentoring (strategic execution)

38. My organization maintains a policy or policies that support procedural justice

Open-ended questions
39. How can procedural justice be better implemented throughout the department?
40. What immediate actions can be taken to improve police relationships in communities
of color?
Open ended question
41. What can leaders do to help improve retention in your department?
Open ended question
42. Are there any other thoughts or additional comments from previous questions you
would like to add for consideration?
Open ended question
Thank you for your participation in this survey and thank you for your commitment and service
to our country. Your sacrifice to serve and the sacrifice your family makes in support is greatly
appreciated.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
206

Appendix C: Qualtrics Information Sheet
Study Title: Procedural Justice and the Impact on the African American
Community: A Gap Analysis
Principal Investigator: Orion Peter Welch

Department: Rossier School of Education
Waite Phillips Hall
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089

My name is Orion P. Welch, and I am a doctoral candidate at the Rossier School of Education at
the University of Southern California. I am inviting you to take part in a research study, which is
an evaluation study on Procedural Justice. Your participation in the study is voluntary and that
you may choose to terminate your participation at any time. This survey contains 40 multiple
choice Likert-scale questions, and 4 open-ended questions that may take up to 15 to 20 inutes
to complete.

Purpose
The purpose of this study is to better understand the opinions of police officers in regard to the
importance of Procedural Justice (PJ) principles in law enforcement. Specifically, I want to
examine PJ through the lens of knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences (KMO).
Risks
There is no personal risk associated with the participation of this study. Your participation in this
study is voluntary and at no time will the researcher ask for your personal identification.
Benefits
Your participation may benefit policing in America by giving a voice to law enforcement
officers, providing a deeper understanding of any existing barriers, and allow for the
optimization of existing strengths within the organization as it pertains to Procedural Justice. The
results of this study may provide helpful insights to increase police legitimacy in the African
communities of color. This approach is beneficial because instead of taking a prescriptive
approach of how to address the perceived issues and challenges of community policing, this
study can provide recommendations for improvement and changes from the police officers’
perspective, who are the subject matter experts on how to execute their duties while maintaining
the safety of the police officers and the communities they serve.

207

Contact Information
If you have questions, concerns, complaints, or suggestions, you can reach the study investigator
at owelch@usc.edu.
This research has been reviewed by the USC Institutional Review Board (IRB). The IRB is a
research review board that reviews and monitors research studies to protect the rights and
welfare of research participants. Contact the IRB if you have questions about your rights as a
research participant or have complaints about the research. You may contact the IRB at (323)
442-0114 or by email at irb@usc.edu.
Note
Thank you for giving a voice to the workforce that is often overworked and misunderstood. Your
contributions are vital to identify challenges and to help make recommendations to address the
unique challenges affecting those who are sworn to protect and serve the public.

208

Appendix D: Immediate Evaluation Tool
Level 1 and 2
Level 1 Survey Questions: The learner will be asked to rate what they have learned in the course.
Rating Scale: Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree.
1. I know how to identify the procedural justice principles.
2. I know how to define each principle.
3. I know how procedural justice could lead to police legitimacy
4. I think I can apply what I learned in this training to help improve community relations
Level 2 Survey Questions: The participant-learner will be asked to rate what they have learned in
the course.
1. I understand how to apply procedural justice principles while performing my duties.
2. I understand how to apply procedural justice principles to meet the expectations of
my department’s goals.
3. I understand how to apply procedural justice principles as it relates to principled
policing
4. I understand what resources are available for procedural justice continuous learning.
5. I understand when to apply procedural justice principles.

209

Appendix E: Delayed Evaluation Tool
Level 1, 2, 3, 4
Level 1 Survey Questions: The learner will be asked to rate what they have learned in the course.
Rating Scale: Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree.
1. I am satisfied with what I learned from the procedural justice training program.
2. I am satisfied I can apply what I learned in the training.
3. I am satisfied understanding procedural justice principles is worthwhile for my
professional development
4. I am satisfied and can apply what I have learned in the procedural justice training to
improve community relations
Level 2 Survey Questions: The learner will be asked to rate what they have learned in the course.
Rating Scale: Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree.
1. I can apply the principles learned in the training to assist me with building community
trust and collaboration.
2. I can apply the principles learned in the training to assist me with meeting my
departments expectations
3. I can apply the principles learned in the training to assist me with reaching my
organizational goals
4. I can apply the principles learned in the training to assist me with improving police
legitimacy.
Level 3 Survey Questions: The learner will be asked to rate what they have learned in the course.
Rating Scale: Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree.
1. I feel procedural justice training is relevant to my duties.
210

2. I feel procedural justice is relevant to me as a professional peace officer.
3. I feel procedural justice is relevant to maintaining community relationships.
4. I feel procedural justice is essential to achieving my department goals.
5. I am satisfied with the procedural justice training program.
Level 4 Survey Questions: The learner will be asked to rate what they have learned in the course.
Rating Scale: Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree.
1. I am seeing positive results from the procedural justice training I received.
2. I am seeing positive results for my department as it relates to procedural justice
training.
3. I am seeing positive results for community cooperation as a result of applying what I
learned.
4. I have seen an impact in decreased in arrests that require use of force.
5. I have seen an impact in stronger relationships with community members as a result
of applying what I learned.

211

Appendix F: Consent Form
INFORMED CONSENT FOR RESEARCH
Study Title: Procedural Justice and the Impact on the African American
Community: A Gap Analysis
Principal Investigator: Orion Peter Welch

Department: Rossier School of Education
Waite Phillips Hall
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089

We invite you to take part in a research study. Please take as much time as you need to read the
consent form. If you find any of the language difficult to understand, please ask questions. If you
decide to participate, you will be asked to select the consent option prior to starting the survey.
By selecting the I consent option, you acknowledge that your participation in the study is
voluntary and that you are aware that you may choose to terminate your participation at any
time.

Purpose
The purpose of this study is to better understand the opinions of police officers in regard to the
importance of Procedural Justice (PJ) principles in law enforcement. Specifically, I want to
examine PJ through the lens of knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences (KMO).
This information will be used to conduct a gap analysis in each organization’s use of procedural
justice, examine the impact of the use of procedural justice in communities of color, assess
common practices throughout participating organizations, as well as create a framework for a
national discussion on procedural justice standards and training. In consideration to the national
discussion surrounding the intersection of policing and race in America, this survey will ask a
few questions surrounding current social issues that may or may not have an impact on the
policing profession.
Risks
There is no personal risk associated with the participation of this study. Your participation in this
study is voluntary and at no time will the researcher ask for your personal identification. Any
identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential. Your
participation in this study will be strictly voluntary, and you have the right to withdraw from the
survey at any point. Demographic questions will be asked during the survey for comparison
purposes only. Any demographic questions asked that may link you to the survey will not be
released and will be destroyed at the end of the study.
Benefits
Your participation may benefit policing in America by giving a voice to law enforcement
officers, providing a deeper understanding of any existing barriers, and allow for the
212

optimization of existing strengths within the organization as it pertains to Procedural Justice. The
results of this study may provide helpful insights to increase police legitimacy and decrease
coercive outcomes in the African American community. This approach is beneficial because
instead of taking a prescriptive approach of how to address the perceived issues and challenges
of community policing, this study can provide recommendations for improvement and changes
from the police officers’ perspective, who are the subject matter experts on how to execute their
duties while maintaining the safety of the police officers and the communities they serve.
Confidentiality
1. This quantitative survey with open ended questions yields a holistic organizational
approach to address the research topic. The report aggregates data and removes all
personal identifiable information. Any personal identifiable information collected is
destroyed after analysis and will not be forwarded outside the researchers conducting the
analysis.
2. The focus of the study is to gather data and protect the participants by ensuring those who
participate are kept confidential.
3. Surveys are sent via direct link, and they are anonymous. The demographic questions are
asked for research comparison to find similarities and differences only.
4. The University of Southern California Institutional Review Board (IRB) and Human
Subject’s Protections Program (HSPP) may review the survey responses.
5. Your survey responses, also called data, will be collected by an online survey tool called
Qualtrics. Access to the survey tool will be stored locally by the researcher on a
password-protected desktop computer within a secured area in accordance with the
retention policies of the University of Southern California.
6. All data collected during this survey will be destroyed at the end of this study.

Contact Information
If you have questions, concerns, complaints, or suggestions, you can reach the study investigator
at owelch@usc.edu.
This research has been reviewed by the USC Institutional Review Board (IRB). The IRB is a
research review board that reviews and monitors research studies to protect the rights and
welfare of research participants. Contact the IRB if you have questions about your rights as a
research participant or have complaints about the research. You may contact the IRB by email at
irb@usc.edu.
Note
Thank you for giving a voice to the workforce that is often overworked and misunderstood. Your
contributions are vital to identify challenges and to help make recommendations to address the
unique challenges affecting those who are sworn to protect and serve the public.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Key factors for successful adoption of culturally relevant and impact driven grantmaking practices

PDF

African American males' lived experience: an autoethography approach

PDF

Identification of barriers to mentoring and their impact on retention and advancement of underrepresented populations in the federal government

PDF

Incorporating social and emotional learning in higher education: a promising practices based development of authentic leadership

PDF

A framework for customer reputation evaluation: an innovation study

PDF

Teachers assumptions on the importance of executive function: a gap analysis evaluation study

PDF

An analysis of influences to faculty retention at a Philippine college

PDF

Knowledge sharing among student affairs professionals at a small faith-based higher education institution

PDF

Black male experience on a community college campus: a study on sense of belonging

PDF

Equitable schooling for African American students: an evaluation study

PDF

Information technology architects’ shift to remote work: an exploration of collaboration challenges

PDF

Knowledge sharing: valuing everyone at the table

PDF

Recruiting African American male teachers to K-12 public school education: an evaluation study

PDF

The antecedents and consequences of low franchisee satisfaction and its effect on retention: an exploration of a critical issue through the lens of Urie Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems theory

PDF

A phenomenological study on cultural taxation and racially minoritized students in graduate postsecondary education

PDF

Leadership and the impact on organizational citizenship behaviors: an evaluation study

PDF

Preparing Asian American leaders in higher education: an exploration study using Bronfenbrenner's ecological model

PDF

And yet, still, they rise: a qualitative study on the persistence of Black undergraduate women at a predominantly White institution

PDF

Leadership in an age of technology disruption: an evaluation study

PDF

Underrepresentation of African Americans in master’s engineering programs

Asset Metadata

Creator Welch, Orion Peter (author)

Core Title Procedural justice and the impact on African Americans: an evaluation study

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2022-08

Publication Date 08/03/2022

Defense Date 07/11/2022

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag knowledge influences,motivation influences,OAI-PMH Harvest,organizational influences,perceptions,principled policing,procedural justice,unjust outcomes

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Tobey, Patricia (committee chair), Datro, Thomas (committee member), Maddox, Anthony (committee member)

Creator Email orionp20@gmail.com,owelch@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC111376002

Unique identifier UC111376002

Legacy Identifier etd-WelchOrion-11087

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Welch, Orion Peter

Type texts

Source 20220803-usctheses-batch-968 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu