Working to Improve Youth-Police Interactions: A Pilot Evaluation of a Program for Young People.

In addition to training law enforcement personnel in strategies to promote positive youth-police interactions, equipping youth with similar knowledge is critical in ensuring safe and effective youth-police encounters. The classroom-based Juvenile Justice Curriculum was designed to equip young people with knowledge about the law and their rights and to empower them to have safer interactions with police. In the current study, we conducted the first evaluation of Strategies for Youth's nationally recognized classroom-based intervention. Cross-sectional data were collected from 155 youth (M age = 15.3; 43% White, 23% Black; 61% boys) after they completed the Juvenile Justice Curriculum. Results from our study indicated young people learned new information regarding what leads to arrest and multiple ways they might consider changing their behaviors when interacting with police. Young people's negative experiences with police officers were significantly associated with reduced views that police respect them and reports that they respect police, and with increased views of police as ethnoracially biased after completing the program. Altogether, our pilot program evaluation of this program demonstrated increased awareness of what constitutes illegal behavior, program engagement, and learned strategies to improve future interactions with police. Findings highlight the importance of policy makers supporting programming like the Juvenile Justice Curriculum as one means of preventing juvenile legal system involvement. While the onus to ensure safe and effective interactions with police should not be on young people, empowering young people to understand the law and their rights may help improve the social climate surrounding community responses to police and police interactions.

Did George Floyd's murder shape the public's felt obligation to obey the police?

OBJECTIVE: Our goal in the present study was to use longitudinal data to assess how normative (i.e., consensually motivated) and instrumental (i.e., coercively motivated) obligation to obey police changed after police murdered George Floyd and whether these changes differed by political ideology. HYPOTHESES: Using procedural justice theory, we hypothesized that after Floyd's murder, participants would feel less normatively obligated and more instrumentally obligated to obey police. We also hypothesized that these trends would be stronger for liberal-leaning than conservative-leaning participants. METHOD: Adults (N = 645) were recruited through Prolific from four politically diverse U.S. states. Participants reported their normative and instrumental obligation across three waves of data collection, each separated by 3 weeks. The first two waves were collected prior to the Floyd's murder, and the third was collected after. RESULTS: Hierarchical linear models indicated that although normative obligation remained stable before Floyd's murder, it declined after Floyd's murder (b = -0.19, 95% CI [-0.24, -0.14], p < .001). In contrast, coercive obligation to obey increased consistently across all three waves. Liberal-leaning participants drove most of the effects. CONCLUSIONS: For researchers, these findings help strengthen our understanding of procedural justice theory by differentiating normative and instrumental obligation and by distinguishing differences by political ideology within the context of a historic police-brutality event. For policymakers and law enforcement, our research suggests that police brutality may undermine the public's normative felt obligation to obey the police, which would be problematic for police reformation efforts grounded in governing by mutual consent versus by fear and coercion. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Adolescents' views of defunding the police, abolishing the police, and "The Talk".

INTRODUCTION: Definitions regarding defunding or abolishing the police are highly contested in the United States. Moreover, adolescents' definitions and how socialization processes shape their definitions are unclear. METHODS: Within a national sample of 822 adolescents ages 13-17 (49.69% female; 63.22% White, 16.93% Black/African American, 11.01% Hispanic/Latinx) surveyed in July 2020, this study examined how youth define defunding versus abolishing the police, how much parents talk to youth about the police (i.e., "the Talk"), and whether relations emerged between defunding/abolishing the police and "the Talk." RESULTS: Youth supported defunding more than abolishing (d = 0.57). Support for abolishing was higher for youth who frequently received "the Talk" (b = 0.25). Differences by race and gender were uncovered in how frequently youth received "the Talk." CONCLUSIONS: Police must recognize that coercion, fear, and biased policing breed discontent and promote families to engage in protective parenting strategies including engaging in "the Talk."

Perceptions of Legal Authorities in a Longitudinal Study of Adjudicated Youth.

While perceptions of the legitimacy of formal authority have been found to influence offending, little is known about the extent to which such perceptions influence the related outcome of victimization. This study addressed this gap by examining how changes in legitimacy affected victimization both within- and between-individuals. This study used 7 waves of the Pathways to Desistance data (n = 1310; 13.85% female; age range 14-22). Youth who have committed serious offenses were surveyed at 6-month intervals during the transition from adolescence to young adulthood. In the full sample, the effects of legitimacy on both victimization and offending remained largely stable over time within individuals. Sensitivity analyses revealed that more positive perceptions of legitimacy significantly reduce offending for boys and reduce victimization for girls during the developmental period under study. Consistent with prior research, between-individual differences appear to be more important than within-individual change for explaining both offending and victimization. The implications of the results for theory, future research, and early intervention for high-risk youth are discussed.

Social distancing in America: Understanding long-term adherence to COVID-19 mitigation recommendations.

A crucial question in the governance of infectious disease outbreaks is how to ensure that people continue to adhere to mitigation measures for the longer duration. The present paper examines this question by means of a set of cross-sectional studies conducted in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic, in May, June, and July of 2020. Using stratified samples that mimic the demographic characteristics of the U.S. population, it seeks to understand to what extent Americans continued to adhere to social distancing measures in the period after the first lockdown ended. Moreover, it seeks to uncover which variables sustained (or undermined) adherence across this period. For this purpose, we examined a broad range of factors, relating to people's (1) knowledge and understanding of the mitigation measures, (2) perceptions of their costs and benefits, (3) perceptions of legitimacy and procedural justice, (4) personal factors, (5) social environment, and (6) practical circumstances. Our findings reveal that adherence was chiefly shaped by three major factors: respondents adhered more when they (a) had greater practical capacity to adhere, (b) morally agreed more with the measures, and (c) perceived the virus as a more severe health threat. Adherence was shaped to a lesser extent by impulsivity, knowledge of social distancing measures, opportunities for violating, personal costs, and descriptive social norms. The results also reveal, however, that adherence declined across this period, which was partly explained by changes in people's moral alignment, threat perceptions, knowledge, and perceived social norms. These findings show that adherence originates from a broad range of factors that develop dynamically across time. Practically these insights help to improve pandemic governance, as well as contributing theoretically to the study of compliance and the way that rules come to shape behavior.

Perceptions of police legitimacy and bias from ages 13 to 22 among Black, Latino, and White justice-involved males.

OBJECTIVE: Although researchers, policymakers, and practitioners recognize the importance of the public's perceptions of police, few studies have examined developmental trends in adolescents and young adults' views of police. HYPOTHESES: Hypothesis 1: Perceptions of police legitimacy would exhibit a U-shaped curve, declining in adolescence before improving in young adulthood. Hypothesis 2: At all ages, Black youth would report more negative perceptions of police legitimacy than Latino youth, who would report more negative perceptions than White youth. Hypothesis 3: Perceptions of police bias would be consistently associated with worse perceptions of police legitimacy. METHOD: Utilizing longitudinal data from the Crossroads Study, this study examined within-person trends in males' perceptions of police legitimacy from ages 13 to 22, as well as whether perceptions of police bias were associated with perceptions of police legitimacy. RESULTS: Perceptions of police legitimacy followed a U-shaped curve that declined during adolescence, reached its lowest point around age 18, and improved during the transition to young adulthood. Compared with White youth, Latino and Black youth had shallower curves in perceptions of police legitimacy that exhibited less improvement during the transition to adulthood. Further, perceptions of police bias were consistently associated with more negative perceptions of police legitimacy across races and ages. CONCLUSIONS: While perceptions of police legitimacy may decline during adolescence before improving during the transition to adulthood, perceptions of police bias are consistently negatively related to youth and young adults' perceptions of police legitimacy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Dynamic Risk Factors for Handgun Carrying: Are There Developmental or Sex Differences?

Objective: This study examines the effects of dynamic risk factors on handgun carrying from adolescence into young adulthood.Method: A nationally representative sample of 8,679 individuals (ages 12-26; 51.1% male; 58% White, 26.8% African American; 21.2% Hispanic ethnicity) from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (1997 cohort) interviewed at least three times across nine annual waves is used to estimate effects on handgun carrying. Key predictors include gang membership, selling and using drugs, violent crime, and arrest. Using mixed effects models, we focus on within-individual effects across three timeframes from ages 12 to 26: 1) predictors and handgun carrying measured concurrently, 2) predictors measured across one year and handgun carrying measured in the final month of the same year, and 3) predictors measured in the wave before handgun carrying. We also contrast estimates by sex and age.Results: All theoretically relevant predictors statistically significantly predict handgun carrying across the first two timeframes. However, none are statistically significant predictors of handgun carrying in the following year. Few significant sex and age differences emerge.Conclusions: Handgun carrying is an ephemeral behavior particularly during adolescence. The predictors of handgun carrying, which are grounded in gangs, drug use/sale, and crime involvement, appear to have short-term impacts that are consistent across age as well as across sex. Consequently, future work should focus on shorter-term changes in models and there is no evidence that intervention efforts must take fundamentally different approaches to reduce handgun use among males versus females or adolescents versus adults.

Partners or adversaries? The relation between juvenile diversion supervision and parenting practices.

OBJECTIVE: Based on guiding principles such as parens patriae, juvenile probation officers (JPOs) not only supervise youth, but in certain jurisdictions they also decide how control-oriented their conditions will be. JPOs' perceptions of parenting could be related to their decision making. This study examined: (a) whether JPOs' perceptions of the home were associated with the conditions they placed on youth; (b) if JPOs' perceptions of the home aligned with the youths' perceptions; and (c) if JPOs' control-oriented conditions were associated with changes in parenting practices. HYPOTHESES: (H1) JPOs' perceptions of the home should be positively related to youths' perceptions of parenting practices. (H2) JPOs' perceptions of the home should be positively associated with the conditions imposed. (H3) JPOs' control-oriented conditions may be positively associated with increased parental supervision, yet they may also be associated with lessened parental supervision. METHOD: The sample consisted of 265 male youth (mean age = 15.41; 76.6% Latino, 19.25% White, 0.75% Black) who were arrested for the first time and placed on supervised diversion. RESULTS: Latent class analyses indicated that there were three supervision conditions classes: standard, moderate, and high control. JPOs' perceptions of the home did not align with youths' perceptions of parenting practices (e.g., rule setting, curfew setting, and monitoring) yet they were the strongest predictor of receiving the most control-oriented conditions. Surprisingly, parental rule setting, curfew setting, and monitoring declined once youth were placed under supervision, and declines did not differ based on how control-oriented their official conditions were. CONCLUSIONS: Parents are thought to be vital in justice-involved youths' success. Yet within this sample, officers' perceptions of the family did not align with youths' perceptions. Further, parental supervision declined equally regardless of how control-oriented youths' supervision conditions were. Parents must be better integrated into the process to enhance the success of youth on community supervision. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Adolescents' confidence in institutions: Do America's youth differentiate between legal and social institutions?

It is widely believed that there is a crisis of confidence in law enforcement in the United States. What remains to be seen, however, is whether adolescents actually differentiate between legal authorities and other types of authorities. Leveraging cross-sectional, nationally representative data of 12th graders from every year from 2006 to 2017 from Monitoring the Future (N = 10,941), the results indicate that adolescents distinguish between legal authorities (e.g., law enforcement, justice system) and social authorities (e.g., schools, religious institutions). Youth report more confidence in social authorities than in legal authorities. Furthermore, whereas confidence in social authorities remained largely stable between the cohorts over the last decade, confidence in legal authorities, and in law enforcement in particular, has declined markedly. Although there may be an era of mistrust in legal authorities, it cannot be attributed to a ubiquitous anti-authority attitude among modern adolescents in the United States. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).