Abstract
Previous experiences with police can influence civilian perceptions of police, and in turn their expectations for future encounters. According to theories on intergroup contact, positive contact predicts positive attitudes toward the outgroup and unpleasant contact predicts negative attitudes. In the case of police-civilian encounters, pleasant interactions with the police are associated with favorable police attitudes among civilians, whereas unpleasant encounters are associated with negative attitudes. In four studies (N = 826) we assessed contact among police and civilians as related to civilian general perceptions of police and (novel to this research area) anticipated officer behavior in an imagined roadside encounter. Across studies and contact type, general perceptions mediated relationships between contact and anticipated behavior. These studies provide preliminary evidence of a process by which contact shapes general perceptions, in turn impacting anticipated police behavior.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
We were specifically interested in contact type (positive, negative, or combined) as related to perceptions of police and anticipated police behavior. As such, we excluded individuals who had no previous contact from relevant analyses.
For the most part, principal components analyses resulted in two factors (i.e., two eigenvalues were greater than 1; in Studies 3 and 4, the second unbiased eigenvalues were just below 1 at 0.86 and 0.98, respectively). The two factor structure explained 72.2%, 78.0%, 81.6%, and 76.8% of the variance for the scale items in Studies 1–4, respectively. In all samples, items loaded onto the correct factors as indicated by Nadal and Davidoff (2015).
This is the first publication to use these data.
We also conducted a series of factor analyses fitting two factors with varimax rotation to combined lists of the POPS and APBS items (24 items total). In all studies, the POPS items loaded onto the first factor and the APBS items loaded onto the second factor. POPS factor loadings ranged from .56 to .87, .61 to .88, .65 to .92, and .64 to .80, for Studies 1–4, respectively. APBS factor loadings ranged from .45 to .85, .45 to .85, .42 to .84, and .52 to .82, for Studies 1–4, respectively (note that the .4 factor loadings were for reverse-scored items), thus indicating acceptable ranges for each factor. Of the 96 total items, only one had a cross-loading above .5, however, the item had a strong primary loading of .75.
In Study 4, the full sample analysis pertaining to close relationships resulted in full mediation for the proposed and alternative models.
In Study 4, the analyses pertaining to unpleasant experience resulted in partial mediation for the proposed model and full mediation for the alternative model for both the full sample and the Black driver subsample.
References
Barlow, F. K., Paolini, S., Pedersen, A., Hornsey, M. J., Radke, H. R. M., Harwood, J., Rubin, M., & Sibley, C. G. (2012). The contact caveat: Negative contact predicts increased prejudice more than positive contact predicts reduced prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(12), 1629–1643. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212457953.
Bartsch, R. A., & Cheurprakobkit, S. (2004). The effects of amount of contact, contact expectation, and contact experience with police on attitudes toward police. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 19(1), 58–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02802575.
Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5(4), 323–370. https://doi.org/10.1037//1089-2680.1.4.323.
Darley, J. M., & Fazio, R. H. (1980). Expectancy confirmation processes arising in the social interaction sequence. American Psychologist, 35(10), 867–881. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.35.10.867.
Ekins, E. (2016). Policing in America: Understanding public attitudes toward the police. Results from a national survey. Retrieved from https://www.cato.org/survey-reports/policing-america.
Eller, A., Abrams, D., Viki, G. T., Imara, D. A., & Peerbux, S. (2007). Stay cool, hang loose, admit nothing: Race, intergroup contact, and public-police relations. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 29(3), 213–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973530701503036.
Fridkin, K., Wintersieck, A., Courey, J., & Thompson, J. (2017). Race and police brutality: The importance of media framing. International Journal of Communication, 21, 3394–3414 Retrieved from https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc.
Li, Y., Ren, L., & Luo, F. (2016). Is bad stronger than good? The impact of police-citizen encounters on public satisfaction with police. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 39(1), 109–126. https://doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-05-2015-0058.
MacInnis, C. C., & Hodson, G. (2019). Extending the benefits of intergroup contact beyond attitudes: When does intergroup contact predict greater collective action support? Journal of Theoretical Social Psychology, 3(1), 11–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts5.23.
McKeown, S., Cairns, E., Stringer, M., & Rae, G. (2012). Micro-ecological behavior and intergroup contact. The Journal of Social Psychology, 152(3), 340–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2011.614647.
Nadal, K. L., & Davidoff, K. C. (2015). Perceptions of police scale (POPS): Measuring attitudes towards law enforcement and beliefs about police bias. Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Science, 3(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.15640/jpbs.v3n2a1.
Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 751–783. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751.
Peyton, K., Sierra-Arévalo, M., & Rand, D. G. (2019). A field experiment on community policing and police legitimacy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(40), 19894–19898. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1910157116.
Pirlott, A. G., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2016). Design approaches to experimental mediation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 66, 29–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.09.012.
Sargent, R. H., & Newman, L. S. (2019). An investigation of civilian implicit attitudes toward police officers. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-019-09330-9.
Tam, T., Hewstone, M., Kenworthy, J., & Cairns, E. (2009). Intergroup trust in Northern Ireland. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35(1), 45–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167208325004.
Turner, R. N., West, K., & Christie, Z. (2013). Out-group trust, intergroup anxiety, and out-group attitude as mediators of the effect of imagined intergroup contact on intergroup behavioral tendencies. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43, 196–205. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12019.
Van Laar, C. V., Levin, S., Sinclair, S., & Sidanius, J. (2005). The effect of university roommate contact on ethnic attitudes and behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41(4), 329–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2004.08.002.
Viki, G. T., Culmer, M. J., Eller, A., & Abrams, D. (2006). Race and willingness to cooperate with the police: The roles of quality of contact, attitudes towards the behaviour and subjective norms. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45(2), 285–302. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466605X49618.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Sirens Media and the volunteers for their assistance in creating the police officer images.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institution (Syracuse University Institutional Review Board) and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed Consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the studies.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix
Appendix
Anticipated Police Behavior Scale
Sample Instructions: Please rate the degree to which you anticipate the driver (Justin) agreeing with the following statements. Justin will expect the police officer to:
Scale Items:
-
1
be friendly.
-
2
treat him (Justin) fairly.
-
3
be a person he (Justin) likes.
-
4
be an understanding person.
-
5
not discriminate.
-
6
ensure he (Justin) stays safe.
-
7
not be helpful in answering his (Justin’s) questions.*
-
8
be truthful and honest in the report.
-
9
be biased.*
-
10
care about his (Justin’s) community.
-
11
make him (Justin) feel unsafe.*
-
12
make him (Justin) feel afraid.*
Note: Items indicated with an asterisk are reverse-scored.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sargent, R.H., Caselli, A.J., Machia, L.V. et al. General perceptions of police mediate relationships between police contact and anticipated police behavior in imagined roadside encounters. Curr Psychol 41, 4350–4357 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-00952-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-00952-5