City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects CUNY Graduate Center 9-2020 Spheres of Identity: Theorizing Social Categorization and the Legitimacy of Criminal Justice Officials Kwan-Lamar Blount-Hill The Graduate Center, City University of New York How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/4010 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] SPHERES OF IDENTITY: THEORIZING SOCIAL CATEGORIZATION AND THE LEGITIMACY OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE OFFICIALS KWAN-LAMAR BLOUNT-HILL A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Criminal Justice in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor in Philosophy. The City University of New York 2020 © 2020 KWAN-LAMAR BLOUNT-HILL All Rights Reserved ii | P a g e Spheres of Identity: Theorizing Social Categorization and the Legitimacy of Criminal Justice Officials by Kwan-Lamar Blount-Hill This manuscript has been read and accepted for the Graduate Faculty in Criminal Justice in satisfaction of the dissertation requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Date Eric L. Piza Chair of Examining Committee Date Valli Rajah Executive Officer, Doctoral Program in Criminal Justice Graduate Center, City University of New York Supervisory Committee Lila Kazemian Kevin T. Wolff Lorraine Mazerolle THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK iii | P a g e ABSTRACT Spheres of Identity: Theorizing Social Categorization and the Legitimacy of Criminal Justice Officials by Kwan-Lamar Blount-Hill Advisor: Eric L. Piza, Ph.D. Identity is of central importance in the subjective experience of justice and assessments of legitimacy. In this study, the researcher explores whether perceptions of legitimacy are constructed differently across social group identity, particularly where social groups differ in relation to government (e.g., outgroup or ingroup). The analyses are conducted using data from a procedural justice study conducted in two U. S. cities. The findings suggest evidence of a generally similar construction of legitimacy though with important dissimilarities based on social group. Additionally, certain respondents’ narratives follow common narrative scripts in describing interactions with police, suggestive of a shared master narrative that guides interpretations among members of a marginalized social group. I used three theories of identity to explore: • Do different social groups assess the legitimacy of criminal justice system (CJS) officials similarly or differently? • Do social groups that view government as an ingroup resource consider an authority figure’s intragroup role in assessing CJS legitimacy? • Is the link between procedural justice and legitimacy mediated by individuals’ ingroup or outgroup status in relation to the government? • Do marginalized outgroups interpret their perceptions of government through collective frames like cultural master narratives or through individual experiences? iv | P a g e ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Giving thanks first to my Inspiration, I would like to thank the Center for Court Innovation for the use of its data, and Dr. Cassandra Ramdath, Dr. Josy Hahn, and Dr. Rachel Swaner for facilitating the research that made this study possible. I thank the communities in Newark, New Jersey, and Cleveland, Ohio, who provided this data, and I promise to return to you the value of what was extracted. I also thank the residents of Cayce and Charleston, South Carolina, in whose service I first explored these thoughts. I thank my committee: Dr. Eric Piza, my chair, for his patience, guidance, and prodding throughout this process; Dr. Kevin Wolff for his counsel, especially on matters of quantitative method; Dr. Lila Kazemian, a foremost advocate of mine, for holding me accountable to a standard of excellence in my work and to seeking peace in my spirit, for connecting me with Dr. Piza and introducing me to narrative identity; Dr. Lorraine Mazerolle for introducing me to social identity theory, now the core of my personal scholarship; you all, collectively, for your service as my committee. I thank Mrs. Beverly Blount-Hill, whose thoughts and reflections are felt throughout this work. I thank Mr. Satish G. Nathan, whose patience and support, critique and encouragement were crucial to its completion. I thank Dr. Scott Wolfe who first inspired my pursuit of scholarship. I thank Dr. Delores Jones-Brown, Dr. Frank Pezzella, and Dr. Mangai Natarajan whose support helped refine my overall epistemological approach. I thank the research unit of the New York City Mayor’s Office of Criminal Justice and its leader, Dr. Brenda Velazquez, for their encouragement and feedback in completing this work. I thank my brother in life and scholarship, Victor J. St. John, whose contribution to this work and myself is impossible to quantify. I thank the members of the American Society of Criminology, the participants in the University of Lausanne’s Summer School and myriad anonymous reviewers for their contributions to portions of this work. v | P a g e DEDICATION This work is dedicated first to my God, next to My partner in life, Satish Nathan My family My people whose strength and love and consistent support make my everyday possible vi | P a g e TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION i. Introduction 1 II. THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS i. Why the need for legitimacy? 6 ii. Defining legitimacy 8 iii. Identity in criminal justice research: Who is the “authority”? 14 iv. Conceptualizing social identity 19 v. Structural symbolic interactionist identity theory 28 vi. Narrative identity and the role of cultural master narratives 30 vii. In sum 34 III. METHODOLOGY AND ANALYTIC APPROACH i. Study methods 37 ii. Phase one: Procedural justice survey 38 Sampling strategy 39 Sample 40 Survey method 41 Survey measures 41 iii. Phase two: Qualitative interviewing 48 Sample strategy 48 Interview method 49 Sample 49 Coding process 50 vii | P a g e IV. QUANTITATIVE DATA ANALYSES AND RESULTS i. Research questions 1 and 2 54 ii. Research question 3 63 V. QUALITATIVE DATA ANALYSES AND RESULTS i. Research question 4 75 A master narrative of legal estrangement: Procedural injustice 79 A master narrative of legal estrangement: Vicarious marginalization 82 A master narrative of legal estrangement: Structural exclusion 85 Social group identity in narration 88 Alternative narratives 91 VI. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION i. Discussion 95 Limitations 102 Policy Implications 108 Future Research 111 ii. Conclusion 112 VII. APPENDIX 115 VIII. REFERENCES 119 viii | P a g e LIST OF TABLES I. Table 1. Correlates and uniqueness between measures of collective efficacy 45 II. Table 2. Survey sample’s perceptions of criminal justice system legitimacy and 47 satisfaction with the CJS III. Table 3. Survey sample’s perceptions of respondents’ last encounters with police 47 IV. Table 4. Demographics of the interview sample 50 V. Table 5. Demographics of the survey sample by social group 55 VI. Table 6. Central tendency and independent samples t-tests of perceptions of the 58 criminal justice system by social group VII. Table 7. Exploratory factor analysis of perceptions of criminal justice system 60 legitimacy with varimax rotation VIII. Table 8. Confirmatory factor analyses of perceptions of criminal justice system 66 legitimacy IX. Table 9. Comparative fit between the group engagement and group value 71 models of legitimation using structural equation modeling X. Table 10. Distribution of interviewees’ perceptions of police 78 LIST OF FIGURES I. Figure 1. Structural equation models – procedural justice and social group 72 identity (ref. outgroup) influence on legitimacy outcomes ix | P a g e CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION On August 9, 2014, Michael Brown was shot and killed by Patrol Officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri (Alter, 2014). He was a young man, Black and unarmed, and his death came to represent the scores of individuals with similar descriptions killed by police. In the wake of community-wide outrage, the police department’s response and the community’s reaction could serve as a study in legitimacy. (Legitimacy researchers have, in fact, studied this incident; exempli gratia, Wolfe & Nix, 2016). Police legitimacy has been defined as the quality or trait of police officials that allows law enforcement to command respect and expect obedience (Tyler, 2004). To be legitimate is, in other words, the ability of police to claim – and act on claims of – authority. When this quality is lacking, the public disregards, dismisses or rebels against police claims of authority, often resulting in the civil unrest that followed the Brown incident. Therefore, police practitioners have an imperative to maintain and enhance their legitimacy. Criminal justice scholars whose work is to be relevant to those police administrators must also endeavor to understand it. The present study takes up this work by questioning how social identity influences civilian assessments of legal authorities and their legitimacy, particularly the police. In response to Ferguson’s unrest following Brown’s death, the State Highway Patrol was called to restore order in Ferguson (Alter, 2014). This could be based merely on a difference in perceived competence. However, it might also reflect a calculation that one agency might have legitimacy when another did not. The captain chosen to lead this effort was Ron Johnson,