Journal of Criminal Justice 28 (2000) 189202

How kids view cops

The nature of juvenile attitudes toward the police
Yolander G. Hursta,*, James Frankb
a

Center for the Study of Crime, Delinquency, and Corrections, Southern Illinois University, Mail Code 4504,
Carbondale, IL 62901,USA
b
Division of Criminal Justice, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA

Abstract
During the past two decades there has been increasing interest in the attitudes of adults toward the police.
There has only been limited interest in the attitudes of juveniles, even though they comprise a significant proportion of the population subject to police contact and arrests. The present study, using data collected through a survey administered to a sample of urban and suburban juveniles, examined the determinants of juveniles attitudes
toward the police. The findings generally suggest that the overall attitudes of juveniles are not quite as favorable
as those reported previously for adults, that the overall level of support voiced by juveniles varied depending on
the focus of the attitude question, that many juveniles selected the neutral response category and failed to voice
positive or negative attitudes, and that many of the variables identified as being theoretically relevant in the literature
on adult attitudes toward the police (e.g., contact with police, respondents races and genders, extent of victimization) are also significant predictors of the attitudes of juveniles. 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Introduction
During the past two decades politicians, social
scientists, and police administrators have become increasingly concerned with the attitudes of citizens toward the police (Brandl et al., 1994; Brown &
Coulter, 1983; Decker, 1981; Erez, 1984; Frank et
al., 1996; Mastrofski, 1981; Percy, 1986). As evaluators and police practitioners have come to see citizens support both as an important outcome in its
own right and as an essential element in the coproduction of public safety, surveys of citizens have
been incorporated increasingly into evaluations of
police strategies (e.g., differential police response,
community policing). Most of the research concerning citizens attitudes, unfortunately, has focused on
assessing the attitudes of adults. In contrast, only a
limited number of studies have examined the attitudes of juveniles toward the police.
This lack of research is unfortunate for several
reasons. First, juveniles comprise a significant pro-

portion of the population subject to police contact

and arrests (Snyder & Sickmund, 1996). Second, the
police are usually the first, and only, criminal justice
officials with whom juveniles have contact. Together, these points may be significant because contacts early in life may shape future relations between
youths and the system (Winfree & Griffiths, 1977). If
the relationship between attitudes toward the police
and citizen willingness to engage in behaviors supportive of the police, or in other words to act as coproducers of public safety and security, is valid (Bell, 1979;
Goldstein, 1987; Skolnick & Bayley, 1988; Stipak,
1979; Thomas & Hyman, 1977; Wycoff, 1988), then
the attitudes of juveniles take on added importance.
Still, researchers have paid only limited attention
to the attitudes of juveniles toward the police. This
neglect is evident in the limited number of studies
performed in this area (Clark & Wenninger, 1964;
Giordano, 1976; Griffiths & Winfree, 1982; Leiber et
al., 1998; Moretz, 1980; Rusinko et al., 1978; Win-

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 618-453-5701; fax: 618-453-6377.

E-mail address: drgail@siu.edu (Y.G. Hurst).
0047-2352/00/$ see front matter 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S0 047-2352(00)00 0 3 5 - 0

190

Y.G. Hurst, J. Frank / Journal of Criminal Justice 28 (2000) 189202

free & Griffiths, 1977). In addition, with the exception of the study by Leiber, Nalla, and Farnworth
(1998), most of the existing studies are quite dated,
failed to include variables that recent studies on attitudes toward the police have suggested are theoretically relevant, and failed to subject their data to rigorous multivariate statistical techniques.
With these points in mind, this study expanded
the existing literature by addressing three research
questions. First, what is the overall level of support
for the police among juveniles? Second, do variables
commonly found to be statistically significant determinants of adult attitudes also explain juvenile attitudes toward the police? Third, and related, are there
other factors than those within the adult literature that
contribute to an explanation of juvenile attitudes?
Attitudes of juveniles toward the police
In 1904, noted African American scholar W. E. B.
DuBois administered a questionnaire to 1,500 African
American children from the Atlanta public school system and 500 students throughout Georgia, in an effort
to assess their perceptions of the courts, police, and
the justice system more generally (DuBois, 1904).
DuBois findings on the police revealed that slightly
more than a third of the students believed the purpose
of the police was to arrest people, while only 20 percent said the police were there to protect people.
When these same students were questioned about how
they were treated by police officers, almost one-third
of the students stated that the police were unkind,
while an additional 40 percent voiced the opposite
opinion (DuBois, 1904, p. 54). Since DuBois exploration of the beliefs of minority youth, there has been
a surprisingly limited number of studies that have examined the attitudes of juveniles toward the police.
A review of the limited research on juveniles attitudes indicates that several trends are apparent in the
extant research. First, the earliest studies were concerned primarily with describing and comparing the attitudes of juveniles toward separate agencies within the
government and the criminal justice system, including
the police (Clark & Wenninger, 1964; DuBois, 1904;
Giordano, 1976). In the 1970s and early 1980s, attention shifted to the examination of the attitudes of juveniles toward just the police (Griffiths & Winfree, 1982;
Moretz, 1980; Winfree & Griffiths, 1977), providing
statistical evidence primarily in the form of correlations
and frequencies. Quite recently, however, this body of
research took a major step forward as Leiber and his
colleagues (1998) conducted a rigorous assessment of
the relationship between subculture theory and the attitudes of juveniles toward the police.

Second, several studies examined how maladjustment to authority, and the system contact that results
from maladjustment, are related to negative attitudes
toward legal institutions. Commitment to criminal or
antisocial norms was initially found to be related to
more negative ratings of legal institutions (Clark &
Wenninger, 1964; Giordano, 1976). These two studies did not subject their data to rigorous statistical
techniques (only frequencies and correlations were
provided), though their findings were confirmed by
Leiber et al. (1998) in their assessment of the relationship between subculture theory and the determinants of juveniles attitudes toward the police.
Third, a number of the juvenile attitudinal studies
examined the variance in juveniles attitudes across
social groups. These research studies explored the relationship between individual-level demographic
characteristics and attitudes toward the police. In
general, they found that respondents demographic
characteristics were not consistently related to the attitudes of juveniles. Two studies (Clark & Wenninger, 1964; Winfree & Griffiths, 1977) did not find
that family economic status was related to the attitudes of juveniles toward the police. Juveniles genders were not found to be statistically significant predictors of attitudes (Moretz, 1980; Winfree &
Griffiths, 1977), though Winfree and Griffiths did
note that males were slightly more critical of the police than females.
Findings concerning the influence of juveniles
races on attitudes toward the police have been mixed.
For example, Winfree and Griffiths (1977) noted that
race had only a minimal effect on attitudes. Rusinko,
Johnson, and Hornung (1978) reported that African
American juveniles tended to give more negative assessments of the police than did White juveniles. Finally, Leiber et al. (1998) found that respondents
races were the strongest predictor of attitudes concerning police fairness and discrimination. In addition, it was determined that juveniles races also had
indirect effects through family economic status, juveniles commitment to a delinquent subculture, and
contact with the police.
Fourth, recent research assessing the attitudes of
juveniles toward the police has focused attention on
the relationship between contact with the police and
the attitudes of juveniles. The findings concerning
this relationship suggest that juvenile contact with
the police is generally associated with more negative
attitudes towards them (Griffiths & Winfree, 1982;
Rusinko et al., 1978; Winfree & Griffiths, 1977).
Leiber et al. (1998) noted that the nature of the police
contact was important. In their study, with African
American juveniles, respect for the police was dimin-

Y.G. Hurst, J. Frank / Journal of Criminal Justice 28 (2000) 189202

ished by contact that involved officers taking juveniles to station houses for questioning, while being
warned and released had the same diminishing effect
for White juveniles.
Attitudes toward the police: expanding the
literature on juveniles
With the exception of the study by Leiber and his
colleagues (1998), studies on juveniles attitudes toward the police are dated and limited in number.
Leiber et al. provided a rigorous test of the relationship between subculture theory and the attitudes of
juveniles toward the police, and included in their
models many variables found to be theoretically relevant in research on adult attitudes toward the police,
though their analysis only included males that were
either accused of delinquency or adjudicated as delinquent (1998, p. 158). All of the males in their
sample were youth that had contact with criminal justice officials, including the police. As a result, it was
valuable as a study that explored the formation of attitudes toward the police by focusing on the relationship between juveniles social environments, delinquent attitudes, and contacts with the police, though
it could not generalize about the attitudes toward the
police by youths in the community, because most of
them had not been arrested and charged with some
form of delinquency. In addition, Leiber et al. (1998)
did not address the attitudes of females.
Merging attitudinal research on adults and juveniles
The present article builds on this recent work and
examines the determinants of the attitudes of male
and female juveniles toward the police. In order to
achieve this objective, the study reexamined the findings in the juvenile literature and incorporated variables from the adult literature that have been found to
be significant predictors of the attitudes of adults toward the police. More specifically, the focus here
was on the explanatory power of four types of variables: demographic variables, crime-related measures, police conduct variables, and confidence in the
criminal justice system.
Demographic variables
The literature on citizens attitudes toward the police has highlighted the relationship between individual-level variables and attitudes toward the police. A
fairly consistent finding in this line of research is that
non-Whites (principally African Americans) are less
satisfied with police services than Whites and, thus,
hold less favorable attitudes toward the police (Albrecht & Green, 1977; Cao et al., 1996; Decker,

191

1981; Furstenberg & Wellford, 1973; Jacob, 1971;

Parks, 1984; Percy, 1981; Scaglion & Condon, 1980;
Smith & Hawkins, 1973).1 The attitudes of nonWhites are often thought to result from two factors:
minority members are more likely to have negative
contact with the police and/or hold more negative attitudes toward governmental authority (Skogan,
1991). Respondents races appear to be a consistent determinant of attitudes in the adult literature, though almost half (42.9 percent) of the studies of juveniles attitudes failed to examine race as a possible determinant.
Existing research has also found that younger individuals often possess less positive attitudes toward
the police than older citizens (Apple & OBrien,
1983; Boggs & Galiher, 1965; Scaglion & Condon,
1980; Smith & Hawkins, 1973). One explanation for
this finding is that younger individuals are more
likely to have hostile (antagonistic) contact with the
police (Erez, 1984; Furstenberg & Wellford, 1973;
Scaglion & Condon, 1980) and as people get older
they tend to believe that the police play a legitimate
role in protecting the status quo. One caution should
be noted when discussing the relationship between
respondents ages and juveniles attitudes. Prior research has compared the attitudes of younger adults
(1821 years old) with those of older individuals.
The present study shed preliminary insight into the
influence of age on the attitudes of juveniles younger
than eighteen. The positive relationship found in the
adult literature, therefore, may not persist.
Findings concerning the influence of gender on
attitudes have been mixed. Apple and OBrien (1983)
found that females voice more positive evaluations of
police than do males (see also: Thomas & Hyman,
1977). Boggs and Galiher (1965), however, found in
their sample of African American respondents that
gender was not a statistically significant predictor of
attitudes.
Crime-related variables
Extant studies have found that individuals who
have been victimized by criminal acts have less positive attitudes toward the police than those without
similar experiences (Dean, 1980; Homant et al., 1984;
Koenig, 1980). In addition, a series of victimizations
may have a more pronounced negative impact on
evaluations than a single victimization (Brown &
Coulter, 1983; Poister & McDavid, 1978). The juvenile literature has failed to measure and assess the impact of prior victimizations on the attitudes of youth.
Perceptions of crime and police efforts to control
criminal behavior may also influence attitudes toward the police. Stipak noted that respondents attitudes toward general neighborhood conditions may

192

Y.G. Hurst, J. Frank / Journal of Criminal Justice 28 (2000) 189202

influence levels of satisfaction with the police

(1979). The impact of neighborhood conditions
should be especially critical where the condition is
one that citizens consider within the function and
control of the police and involves an issue of concern
to citizens (Apple & OBrien, 1983; Christenson &
Taylor, 1983; Percy, 1981; 1986; Stipak, 1979). Citizens beliefs about whether the police are visible and
effective in combating crime should have an influence on their attitudes toward the police. The existing
literature on juveniles has not concerned itself with
variables of this nature.
Police conduct variables
The sole existing juvenile study that examined the
explanatory power of contact with the police in a
multivariate model found that it is a theoretically relevant predictor (see Leiber et al., 1998). This finding
is consistent with the adult literature that has suggested that citizen experiences with the police greatly
influence their attitudes toward police performance
(Furstenberg & Wellford, 1973; Parks, 1984; Scaglion & Condon, 1980; Rusinko et al., 1978; Zamble &
Annesley, 1987). Several researchers concluded that
experiences should have more predictive power than
demographic variables (Koenig, 1980; Parks, 1984;
Winfree & Griffiths, 1977), since without contact,
people have much less information on which to base
their attitudes (Brown & Coulter, 1983).
When assessing the relationship between contact
with the police and attitudes, it is critical to measure
two dimensions of the police-citizen encounter. First,
it is important to examine who initiated the contact
(Dean, 1980; Scaglion & Condon, 1980; Skogan,
1991). Second, citizens assessments of their experiences with the police are also of utmost importance
(Percy, 1986; Scaglion & Condon, 1980). The magnitude of the assessments effect often varies depending upon whether the contact is positively or negatively evaluated, with negative evaluations usually
having a greater effect (Brandl et al., 1994; Dean,
1980; Erez, 1984; Mastrofski, 1981; Skogan, 1991).
Measures used in the extant juvenile research concerning contacts with the police were either too general or erroneously operationalized. Neither Giordano
(1976) nor Winfree and Griffiths (1977) accounted
for citizens evaluations of officer behavior during encounters. Leiber et al. (1998), for two of their three
contact variables, measured frequency of each type of
contact (taken to the police station and warned and released) and not juveniles assessments of officer behavior. Their third contact variable asked juveniles if
they were wrongly accused by the police, which implied evaluative assessments of officer behavior.

The adult literature also suggested that persons

knowing of police misconduct experienced by others
will have less positive attitudes toward the police.
(Dean, 1980; Koenig, 1980; Murty et al., 1990; Smith &
Hawkins, 1973). This presumably occurs because
knowledge of the negative experience of another provides unfavorable information that is cognitively accessed when voicing attitudes toward the police.
Levels of support for the police: examining the
adult literature
One consistent finding in the literature on the attitudes of adults toward the police has been that most
people voice favorable attitudes, irrespective of the
focus of the attitude question or the response categories (e.g., level of satisfaction, whether police did a
good job, etc.). Brandl, Frank, Wooldredge, and Watkins (1997) found that 80 percent of their sample was
satisfied with the police, while Frank et al. (1996) reported that approximately 65 percent of their sample
was at least somewhat satisfied with the police. Favorable attitudes toward the police have also been reported when adults were asked about whether the police do a good job. Albrecht and Green (1977)
determined that 60 percent of their sample agreed
with this statement, and 80 percent of the Reiss (1971)
sample said the police do a good or fairly good job.
Finally, 75 percent of the adults surveyed by Albrecht
and Green (1977) said that they respect the police, and
White and Menke (1982) determined that 84.1 percent of their sample said the police were competent.
The specific attitudes reported for adults in prior
studies follow a similar pattern; namely, adults
voiced favorable attitudes. For example, Cao et al.
(1996) found that 81.9 percent of their sample of
adults agreed that police do a good job protecting
them against crime (see also: Brandl et al., 1997).
Dean (1980) determined that between 72 and 85 percent of the sample were satisfied with police behavior
during recent contact with the police (see also: Brandl &
Horvath, 1991; Furstenberg & Wellford, 1973; Jacob,
1971). Finally, Frank et al. (1996) reported that 46.7
percent of their White respondents and 30.9 percent of
their Black respondents believed that the police do a
good job controlling the sale and use of drugs.
Method
Study sample
Data for this study were collected using selfadministered surveys distributed to high school students in and around Cincinnati, Ohio. The sample
consisted of ninth through twelfth graders enrolled in

Y.G. Hurst, J. Frank / Journal of Criminal Justice 28 (2000) 189202

two Cincinnati public schools and one Hamilton

County public school. Students attending Cincinnati
public schools generally reside within the city limits,
while students attending Hamilton County public
schools generally reside outside the city limits but
within the county in which Cincinnati is located. A
total of 510 students attending two city public
schools and 342 students from a county public school
completed the survey (n 852). All but six of the
sample students returned usable surveys for a response rate of 99.3 percent.
Surveys were administered in the spring of 1996,
by either classroom teachers or the first author and
her colleagues. In one city public school and in the
county public school the survey was administered by
a member of the research team and each survey
packet contained a letter introducing the project. In
the remaining city public school the surveys, with
cover letters attached, were distributed by teachers.
Each county survey packet contained the same cover
letter that was distributed to the Cincinnati students.
The characteristics of the study sample were: 62.9
percent White Americans, 30.3 percent Black, 1.1
percent Asian, 1 percent Hispanic, and 4.7 percent
other; 46.5 percent male and 53.5 percent female; the
mean age of respondents was 16.7 years; the average
grade level was eleventh; and 60 percent were students in the Cincinnati Public School System (urban
schools), while 40 percent attended the county school.
Measures
In accordance with the objectives of this study,
the survey of juveniles was designed to collect data
on the attitudes of juveniles toward the police and the
determinants of those attitudes. An overview of the dependent and independent variables used in the analysis
follows.
Dependent variables: attitudes toward the police
Eleven survey items asked juveniles about their
attitudes toward the police. The police referent varied
in these eleven questions. For instance, some questions asked the respondents to evaluate the police in
their neighborhood, others asked about the police in
the city of Cincinnati or just mentioned the police
without providing a specific referent. This approach
was taken for two reasons. First, many students travel
across the city (e.g., going to and from school) and
might have contact with officers in their neighborhood as well as officers throughout the city. Second,
varying the referent might bring other police officers
to the attention of respondents. Recent research suggested that similar cues were used when formulating
responses to questions, which vary the referent

193

(Brandl, et al., 1997). The answers of respondents to

survey items, therefore, were likely to be premised on
their perceptions of all police officers the they had information about. Respondents used a five-point Likert
scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly
agree to rate each of the eleven attitudinal items.
Following the lead of Brandl et al. (1994) and
White and Menke (1982), both global attitudes and
attitudes about specific police functions were measured (see Easton, 1965).2 The four global attitude
questions were: (1) In general, I trust the police; (2)
In general, I am satisfied with the police in my neighborhood; (3) In general, police officers do a good job;
and (4) In general, I like the police. Responses to
these four attitudinal items were summed to create a
global attitude scale, with high scores indicating
more positive attitudes toward the police (Cronbachs .887).3
The remaining seven survey items were used to
create the specific attitude measure. The specific
items were: The police will help you if your car is
broken down and you need help. . . . The police do a
good job of stopping people from selling drugs. . . .
The police do a good job of stopping people from using drugs. . . . The police do a good job in keeping
my neighborhood quiet at night. . . . The police do a
good job of stopping crime. . . . If the police see
someone who is sick and needs help, they will do
their best to help them. . . . [and] The police do a
good job in stopping people from hanging around on
street corners and causing trouble. Responses to
these seven items were also summed, with higher
scores indicating more positive beliefs about police
performance of specific police functions ( .794).4
A final scale that included all eleven attitudinal
items was also created. This scale measured the overall attitudes of juveniles toward the police. The reliability coefficient for this scale was ( .872).5
Independent variables
One objective of the present study was to explore
the determinants of juveniles attitudes toward the police. This research explored the effects of those variables, which prior attitude research has suggested are
theoretically relevant. Several of these variables have
been examined infrequently in prior juvenile attitude
research, while others have not been examined at all.
Demographic variables
Survey responses were used to collect data on
four respondent characteristics. First, respondents
races were coded as 0 White, 1 non-White.6
Second, age was measured as the juveniles ages in
year when they completed the survey instrument.

194

Y.G. Hurst, J. Frank / Journal of Criminal Justice 28 (2000) 189202

Third, respondents genders were coded as 0 male

and 1 female. Fourth, where the respondents attended school was collected as a proxy for whether
the juveniles lived within the citys limits, which is
required to attend the city school, or in the county.7
Crime-related variable
Survey items were used to determine the extent of
victimization suffered by respondents, since it has
been suggested that prior victimizations, and especially a series of victimizations influence attitudes toward the police. Juveniles were asked, During the last
year, from May of last year to now, have any of the
following crimes been committed against you personally?Someone broke into your house. . . . You had
property stolen from your house or yard. . . . Someone stole, broke into your/the family car. . . .
Someone took your purse or wallet while you were
on the street. . . . Someone threatened to beat you up
or threatened you with a knife, gun, or other weapon.
. . . Someone actually beat you up (in a fight you
didnt start). . . . [or] Some other crime not mentioned
here happened to you. Affirmative responses to
these questions were summed to create a total victimization score (mean 1.288).
Police activities aimed at preventing victimizations were operationalized by two variables. Respondents were asked, On a normal day, how likely is it
that you will see a police officer in your neighborhood? A second question asked about the likelihood
of seeing an officer in other parts of the city. Response options were: very likely, somewhat likely,
somewhat unlikely, and very unlikely.
Two additional questions were used to assess juveniles perceptions of crime within their neighborhoods. First, they were asked to compare crime rates
in their neighborhood to other neighborhoods with
the response options being: lower than most, about
the same, and higher than most. Second, they were
questioned about whether they felt crime had increased, stayed the same, or decreased in their neighborhoods.
Police conduct variables
Survey items were constructed to allow an assessment of both the initiators of the police-citizen encounters and the citizens perceptions of officer behavior during the interactions. Each juvenile was first
asked if he/she had experienced a personal encounter
with a police officer as a result of: (1) victimization,
(2) asking for information, (3) asking for help with a
problem other than something involving a crime, (4)
being stopped while standing on the street, (5) being
stopped while driving or riding in a car, (6) being arrested, (7) talking to an officer for no special reason

on the street, and (8) talking to an officer for no special reason while in school. For each type of contact
the juveniles said they had experienced, they were
asked to rate how they were treated during the problems, incidents, or encounters. Response options
were: very poor, poor, good, and very good.
The responses to the police contact questions
were used to create four variables. First, the type of
contact was examined to determine whether the encounter was initiated by a police officer or citizen.
Second, the citizens evaluation of the officers behavior was used to determine whether the interaction
had been positively evaluated or not. There were,
therefore, two variables denoting positive police encounters: (1) police initiated contact wherein juveniles reported good or very good treatment, and (2)
citizen initiated contact wherein juveniles reported
good or very good treatment. There were also two
variables denoting negative police encounters: (1)
police initiated contact in which juveniles believed
they were treated in a poor or very poor manner, and
(2) citizen initiated contact in which juveniles believed they were treated in a poor or very poor manner.8
Vicarious conduct involved police officer behavior with a third party that was seen or heard about by
the respondent. This variable was operationalized
through a series of questions that first asked juveniles
if they had seen any of the following practices of the
police being directed at a citizen: impolite or rude
treatment, unfair treatment when making an arrest,
physical abuse, covering up another officers wrongdoing, taking sides in an argument between citizens,
and an officer not performing required duties. A second series of questions repeated the same practices of
the police and asked respondents if they had heard
about officer behavior involving each of these types
of conduct. Affirmative responses were then summed
to measure the respondents extent of vicarious information about police misconduct.9
Findings
Two strategies were utilized to examine the attitudes of juveniles toward the police. First, the frequencies to the eleven attitudinal items were examined to assess the extent of support the police enjoy.
Second, to explore the determinants of juveniles attitudes toward the police, the results of multivariate
analyses are presented.
Overall level of juveniles attitudes toward the police
Table 1 displays the distribution of responses to
the eleven attitudes toward the police measures. The
responses indicate that there is not widespread sup-

Y.G. Hurst, J. Frank / Journal of Criminal Justice 28 (2000) 189202

port for the police among juveniles in the sample and

that their level of support varies depending upon the
focus of the attitudinal question. For example, in response to the general attitude items less than 40 percent of the respondents voiced favorable attitudes to
any of these measures. In particular, 39.8 percent of
those surveyed agreed or strongly agreed with the
statement, In general, I trust the police, while 38.8
percent agreed that they are satisfied with the police
in their neighborhoods. Thirty-eight percent believed the police are doing a good job and slightly
less than one-third (31.9 percent) of the respondents
agreed that, In general, I like the police.
The specific police function attitude items elicited
varying levels of support depending on the police
function that was the focus of the measure. Four of
the measures tapping juvenile attitudes about specific
police functions elicited attitudes that were less positive than the general attitudes. This pattern however,
was reversed for three other specific service-related
functions. Only 6.8 percent of the juveniles agreed or
strongly agreed with the statement, that The police
do a good job of stopping people from selling drugs,
while only 5 percent of the teenagers surveyed
agreed that police officers do a good job of stopping
people from using drugs. On a more positive note
though still evidence of less than widespread favorable attitudes20.4 percent of the respondents believed that the police do a good job of stopping peo-

195

ple from hanging around on street corners and

causing trouble, and 19.6 percent agreed that the police do a good job of stopping crime (Table 1).
The most favorable specific attitudes involved
measures of three police service functions. Slightly
more than 40 percent (42.1) of the respondents said
the police do a good job keeping their neighborhoods quiet at night. In addition, almost half of
those sampled (49.4 percent) agreed that the police
will help you if your car is broken down, and 52.4 percent responded favorably to the statement that the police will be of assistance to sick persons in need of help.
One final note is in order concerning juveniles attitudes toward the police. The neutral response option
was either the most, or second most, commonly selected
response category for all but two of the attitudinal items
(buying and selling drugs). One could therefore argue
that juveniles do not express overwhelming disagreement with the attitudinal items either. The critical finding displayed in Table 1 is that there is not the overall
widespread support for the police that others have found
in extant studies of adult attitudes toward the police.
In order to assess the samples level of support
more closely, the responses to the attitudinal questions were reexamined, this time excluding those juveniles that selected the neutral response category
(Table 2). A majority of respondents agreed with
seven of the ten attitudinal statements, though in only
two instances do the percentages (76.8 percent and

Table 1
Juvenile level of support for the policea

General
In general, I trust the police.
In general, I like the police.
In general, I am satisfied with the police in
my neighborhood.
In general, police officers do a good job.
Specific
The police do a good job of stopping crime.
The police do a good job of stopping people
from using drugs.
The police do a good job of stopping people
from selling drugs.
The police do a good job in keeping my
neighborhood quiet at night.
The police will help you if your car is broken
down and you need help.
If the police see someone who is sick and
needs help, they will do their best to help.
a
Figures represent percents.
N 848.

Strongly
disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly
agree

11.0
16.4

16.6
15.3

32.7
36.4

32.9
24.2

6.9
7.7

3.078
2.914

14.0
8.0

19.6
15.9

27.6
38.0

29.4
30.6

9.4
7.4

3.006
3.135

14.7

26.4

39.3

16.5

3.1

2.668

45.5

35.0

14.6

3.8

1.2

1.802

42.8

32.6

17.8

5.4

1.4

1.901

15.1

17.6

25.0

28.2

14.0

3.085

5.8

15.6

29.2

38.6

10.8

3.333

3.2

12.6

31.8

39.3

13.1

3.465

196

Y.G. Hurst, J. Frank / Journal of Criminal Justice 28 (2000) 189202

69.8 percent) rival those reported in research on

adults. Both of these attitudinal statements address
support for police performance of service functions
(the police will help someone sick and help if your
car is broken down). The responses to the remaining
three attitudinal items suggest substantial disagreement with the statements (94.2 percent, 91.7 percent,
and 67.8 percent, respectively). In addition, 49.9 percent of the respondents disagreed with the statement
that they liked the police.
Due to variation in question focus, response categories, and the police referent, exact comparisons between this studys findings and those existing in prior
research on adults were impossible. At the same time,
some comparisons were still proper and infer that juveniles in the current sample do not support the police to
the same extent as adults. For example, Cao et al.
(1996) found that 81.9 percent of their respondents believed the police do a good job protecting them against
crime, while in the current sample only 32.2 percent of
the juveniles said the police do a good job stopping
crime. Frank and his colleagues (1996) found that
46.7 percent of their White respondents and 30.9 per-

Table 2
Juvenile level of support for the police excluding
neutral respondentsa

General
In general, I trust police.
In general, I like the police.
In general, I am satisfied with
the police in my neighborhood.
In general, police officers do a
good job.
Specific
The police do a good job of
stopping crime.
The police do a good job of stopping
people from using drugs.
The police do a good job of stopping
people from selling drugs.
The police do a good job in keeping
my neighborhood quiet at night.
The police will help you if your
car is broken down and you
need help.
If the police see someone who is
sick and needs help, they will
do their best to help.
a

Disagreeb

Agree

41.1
49.9

59.9
50.1

46.4

53.6

38.6

61.4

67.8

32.2

94.2

5.8

91.7

8.3

43.6

56.4

30.2

69.8

23.2

76.8

Figures represent percents.

b
The disagree category includes strongly disagree and
disagree, while the agree category includes both strongly
agree and agree.

cent of their Black respondents believed that the police

do a good job controlling the sale and use of drugs. The
proportion of youth in the present study that agreed
with the statement asking about police performance in
stopping people from using drugs was a mere 5.8 percent, and only 8.3 percent agreed that the police do a
good job stopping the sale of drugs (Table 2). Finally,
Albrecht and Green (1977) reported that 60 percent of
their sample and 80 percent of the adults in the sample
by Reiss (1971) said the police do a good or fairly
good job, while 61.4 percent of the juveniles in this
study agreed with a similar statement about the police.
Multivariate analyses
To assess whether various demographic, crimerelated, and police conduct variables influence juveniles attitudes toward the police, three regression
equations were estimated. The dependent variable in
the overall equation was the scale created using all
eleven attitudinal measures. Consistent with prior research, an equation using the general attitude scale as
the dependent variable and another equation using the
attitude toward performance of specific police functions scale as the dependent variable were estimated.
Table 3 contains the results of these analyses. The
findings are presented by examining the three sets of
explanatory variables, because of the consistent effects
of many of the variables across the three equations. A
correlation matrix was also computed: No correlations
among the independent variables were high enough to
suggest the presence of multicollinearity (Table 4).
Demographic variables
The school system variable was significantly related to all three attitudinal measures with urban students more likely to express less favorable attitudes
than students attending suburban schools. The three remaining demographic variables exerted less consistent
effects, though each (age, gender, and race) was significant in at least two of the equations (Table 3). Respondents ages and genders were significant in the overall
attitude equation and the specific attitude equation, and
females were more likely to express less favorable attitudes than males. On the other hand, respondents
races were significant in the overall and general attitude equations. The direction of the variables coefficients indicates that for these two equations, nonWhites (primarily African American students) voice
less positive attitudes than White students.
Crime-related variables
As can be seen in Table 3, only two of the five
crime-related variables were significant in any of the
estimated equations. The variable regarding comparisons by juveniles of crime in their neighborhoods

Y.G. Hurst, J. Frank / Journal of Criminal Justice 28 (2000) 189202

197

Table 3
Determinants of juveniles attitudes toward the police
Overall

Demographic
Age
Race
Gender
School
Crime related
Victimization
Crime within neighborhood
Crime out of neighborhood
Visible within neighborhood
Visible out of neighborhood
Police conduct
Police initiative positive
Police initiative negative
Citizen initiative positive
Citizen initiative negative
Vicarious conduct
Adjusted R2
N

General

Specific

Beta

Beta

Beta

.506*
1.632**
1.342**
1.396**

.060
.099
.083
.086

.099
1.017***
.324
.475*

.024
.111
.041
.060

.414**
.554
1.013***
.954**

.069
.055
.104
.097

.401*
.191
1.641***
.191
.368

.065
.020
.143
.026
.032

.231*
.038
.588***
.013
.081

.078
.008
.105
.003
.015

.177
.214
1.095***
.17
.286

.048
.038
.158
.039
.041

.385
1.438***
.765***
.328
1.044***

.035
.207
.183
.037
.356

.141
.897***
.419***
.231
.499***

.026
.267
.206
.054
.352

.244
.521***
.357***
.089
.554***

.037
.124
.141
.016
.314

.408
818

.459
819

.281
820

*p .05; **p .01; ***p .001.

versus other neighborhoods was statistically significant in all three equations. In addition, the beta coefficient in the specific attitude equation indicated that
it exerts the second greatest effect of the included
variables on these attitudes, while on the overall attitude scale it exerts the third largest impact. In contrast, respondents perceptions of whether crime is
increasing or decreasing in their own neighborhoods
did not exert a significant effect in any of the estimated equations (Table 3). It appears that juveniles
engage in comparative assessments of officer ability
to control crime and hold police responsible when
they see crime worsening in their own neighborhoods
as compared to other areas of town.
A significant effect was also found for the extent of
victimization variable, as it was significant in two of
the attitudinal equations and the direction of each of the
coefficients was negative as suspected. Increases in the
number of victimizations were related to having less favorable overall and general attitudes toward the police.
The two visibility variables (visibility outside and
within respondents neighborhoods), however, were
not significant in any of the three attitudinal equations.
Police conduct variables
The findings presented in Table 3 also provide partial support for the contention that evaluations of police-citizen encounters are predictors of attitudes. Two
of the contact variables were significant across all cat-

egories (police-initiated negative contact and citizeninitiated positive contact), while two of the contact
variables were not significant in any of the equations
(police-initiated positive contact and citizen-initiated
negative contact). Those juveniles stopped or arrested
by police and treated, in their perception, poorly or
very poorly were less positive in their attitudes. On the
other hand, juveniles who initiated contact with the police and viewed the police behavior in the encounter as
good or very good were more likely to hold favorable
attitudes toward the police. The beta coefficients for
these two contact variables indicate that they exert
substantial influence on all of the attitude scales.
There were also consistent effects for the vicarious conduct variable across all three attitudinal equations. Teenagers with higher scores on the vicarious
conduct scale (saw or heard more types of improper
police behavior involving other people) reported less
positive attitudes toward the police in each model. The
beta coefficients in each instance indicate that this
variable exerts the greatest effect, of the included variables, on each of the three attitude scales (Table 3).

Discussion and conclusion

This study examined the attitudes toward the police of a rarely studied populationjuveniles. This is
unfortunate because juveniles comprise a substantial

R2

*p .01; **p .001.

.03

.3

1.00
.07 1.00
.02
.07
.08
.49**
.04
.01
.02
.03
.02
.16**
.03
.28**
.05 .03
.03
.01
.01
.04
.01
.01
.09 .02
.03
.25**
.03 .07

1. Age
2. Race
3. Gender
4. School
5. Victim
6. Crime within
7. Crime outside
8. Visible within
9. Visible out of
10. Police initiative positive
11. Police initiative negative
12. Citizen initiative positive
13. Citizen initiative negative
14. Vicarious
15. Confidence in criminal justice

Variable

Table 4
Correlation matrix of variables in analysis (N 848)

.06

1.00
.01
.08
.05
.01
.06
.04
.05
.21**
.04
.04
.07
.06

.3

1.00
.34**
.04
.19**
.35**
.02
.01
.05
.02
.01
.14**
.01

.25

1.00
.09
.23**
.19**
.18**
.05
.32**
.11**
.29**
.35**
.11*

.07

1.00
.25**
.10
.05
.01
.07
.03
.06
.09
.09

.19

.30

1.00
.34** 1.00
.03
.22**
.04
.04
.10*
.22**
.01
.04
.09*
.10*
.16**
.19**
.11** .1*

.09

1.00
.02
.11*
.08
.02
.09*
.01

.11

1.00
.21**
.20**
.04
.08
.12

10

12

.27

.07

1.00
.04
1.00
.16** .01
.38**
.22**
.18** .06

11

.12

1.00
.22**
.12**

13

15

.27

.07

1.00
.19** 1.00

14

198
Y.G. Hurst, J. Frank / Journal of Criminal Justice 28 (2000) 189202

Y.G. Hurst, J. Frank / Journal of Criminal Justice 28 (2000) 189202

portion of the population likely to have contact with

the police (Snyder & Sickmund, 1996), attitudes
formed early in life are likely to persist over time,
and these attitudes may influence both teenager willingness to act as coproducers of public safety and
their behavior during encounters with the police
(Bell, 1979; Goldstein, 1987; Skolnick & Bayley,
1988; Stipak, 1979; Winfree & Griffiths, 1977). In
order to explore the attitudes of juveniles two approaches were used. First, the extent of support for
the police among the study sample was examined.
Next, the determinants of juveniles attitudes toward
the police were explored.
Level of support
The findings concerning level of support for the
police indicated that juveniles do not express widespread support for the police, and more importantly,
not the level of support extant studies have found for
adults. When all the responses were considered less
than 40 percent (Table 1) of the respondents agreed
with any of the general attitude items about liking the
police, being satisfied with them, or trusting them. A
higher proportion of the sample (42.2 to 52.4 percent) agreed with specific attitudinal measures that
concerned helpful or truly service roles of the police
(keeping the neighborhood quiet at night, helping
people with car problems, and helping sick people),
while the percent who agreed plummeted when the focus of the attitudinal items addressed controlling the
use and sale of drugs (5 percent and 6.8 percent, respectively), stopping crime (19.6 percent), and keeping
people from hanging out on the streets (20.4 percent).
In addition, a substantial minority of youths disagreed with these same attitudinal items and reported
negative attitudes toward the police (Table 1). Excluding the two drug-related items, which admittedly are
unique issues of concern, the proportion of juveniles
that expressed unfavorable beliefs about the police
ranged from 15.8 to 44.1 percent. In addition, between
25 percent and 39.3 percent were neutral. The result is
that the police are likely to encounter, on a fairly regular basis, youths who are not favorable to them.
The present findings refute those of White and
Menke (1982), and others who contended that citizens overall express positive attitudes toward the police. In only one instance did the youth in this study
report more favorable attitudes than those reported in
the extant literature on adults: Albrecht and Green
(1977) determined that 60 percent of their sample
agreed with the statement that police do a good job,
while 61.4 percent of the current respondents agreed
with a similar statement. At the same time however,
80 percent of the sample studied by Reiss (1971) said

199

the police do a good or fairly good job. Overall, the

findings in the present study indicate that juveniles
did not express widespread support for the police,
thus efforts directed at increasing support for the police and involving juveniles in the coproduction process may be quite difficult and challenging for police
agencies. Albrecht and Green (1977) stated two decades ago that any policy aimed at changing attitudes
toward the police, independent of changing attitudes
toward the system as a whole, may be ineffective.10
Realizing that the police do not function in a vacuum,
and are the representatives of a system many juveniles are likely to have contact with, policies and programs should be developed that focus on changing
not only perceptions of the police but also perceptions of the system as a whole. Whether this effort
entails having a representative of each agency of the
system act as community liaison, it is imperative that
the police along with other agents engage in nonadversarial contact (see Table 1 for attitudes regarding
police performance of purely service or helpful functions) with juveniles in an effort to educate them
about their purpose and function.
Future research might examine why the attitudes
of juveniles are not as favorable toward the police as
are those reported for adults. This could be accomplished through intensive interviews with small samples of juveniles from various social groups. Loosely
structured interviews that permit respondents to provide information on their expectations of the police
during encounters, their beliefs about the police role,
their perceptions of police practices, and their expectations of what the police should accomplish may allow a better and more complete understanding of the
belief systems of juveniles. In addition, this information may prove useful to police administrators and
community leaders involved in improving perceptions of the police. At a minimum, it may be valuable
to those involved in educating the public about the
nature and content of police work.
Finally, if the present findings in the adult literature are correct and generalizable to the juveniles in
this study, then it appears that the attitudes of minority youth may actually improve over time and approach the more positive ratings of minority adults.
This is noted because as the aforementioned studies
suggested, most adults are positive in their overall attitudes toward the police
Determinants of juveniles attitudes
In an effort to advance the literature on the attitudes of juveniles toward the police, three regression
equations that included variables, which extant research has suggested are theoretically relevant were

200

Y.G. Hurst, J. Frank / Journal of Criminal Justice 28 (2000) 189202

estimated (see also: Leiber et al., 1998). This technique permitted an examination of the influence of
variables that extant studies on juveniles have not addressed, but also allowed for a rigorous reexamination of the sources of the attitudes of youths.
Several variables exerted consistent and strong effects across all three equations. First, three of the police conduct variables were significant in the general,
specific, and overall attitude equations. Seeing or
hearing about police misconduct directed at third parties (vicarious conduct) was not only significant
across all models, but also exerted the greatest impact
on attitudes toward the police. Police-initiated contacts that were negatively evaluated by juveniles and
citizen-initiated contacts that were positively evaluated also were significant in all three equations.
These findings confirm recent studies in the adult
literature (Brandl et al., 1994; Dean, 1980; Erez,
1984, Homant et al., 1984; Skogan, 1991) that found
it is the citizens evaluation of police behavior during
an encounter that is critical, and that negatively and
positively evaluated encounters do not exert equal effects. The present study provides the first insight into
whether these findings hold true when the attitudes of
juveniles are explored. Officer behavior is critical not
only during face-to-face encounters with citizens, but
also during encounters with other citizens where the
individual doing the evaluating acquires the information through vicarious contact. Police departments
could gather feedback from citizens experiencing recent encounters to isolate those behaviors that lead to
positive or negative evaluations. Once this initial step is
completed, the police could take a proactive stance to
remedy problems that exist, or make adjustments to
their procedures as necessary, which in turn could affect
the overall attitudes citizens hold toward the police.
Second, one of the crime-related variables and
one demographic variable exerted consistent effects
across the equations. In particular, respondents comparisons of crime in their neighborhoods to crime
elsewhere exerted a consistent significant effect on
each of the attitudinal measures. Those juveniles who
believed that crime was worse in their communities
than other communities held less favorable attitudes
toward the police. At the same time, the crime variable measuring juveniles perception of crime conditions solely in their own neighborhoods was not significant. The youths in the present study appear to
hold the police responsible for what they perceive as
a worsening of conditions in their own neighborhoods when they make comparative assessments, but
do not hold the police responsible for conditions generally where they reside. It therefore appears that
these juveniles may hold the police responsible for

not engaging in the same enforcement efforts in their

communities as in other neighborhoodsalmost as if
their neighborhoods are receiving less than is necessary to maintain themselves. It should also be noted
that the extent of victimization experiences during
the prior year was a significant predictor of overall
and general attitudes. Juveniles apparently hold the
police responsible for protecting them from actually
being victimized.
Finally, the present study also found that teenagers residing within the city and attending city public
schools (urban sample) assessed the police less positively than juveniles attending the suburban public
school. This finding was consistent across all three
attitudinal variables. In addition, this finding is consistent with prior adult research (Albrecht & Green,
1977; Jacob, 1971).
Consistent with prior research, the influence of respondents demographic characteristics on attitudes
was examined. Similar to the findings from the adult
literature, racial minorities were more likely to hold
less positive attitudes toward the police than Whites.
These attitudes apparently form quite early in life for
many minority youth. Females, in the sample were
also less likely to hold positive overall and specific
attitudes toward the police. One possible explanation
for this finding is the fact that girls were more likely
to have heard of police misconduct, which was also
related to less favorable attitudes. It appears that vicarious misconduct had a substantial influence on the
attitudes of females toward the police.
The present study sample suffers from several
possible limitations. First, the sample consisted only
of students in a single Midwestern metropolitan area.
Expanding the sample to include juveniles in rural areas who may have had different experiences with the
police or have different expectations of the police,
may influence the findings. The findings presented
here received support in the literature on the attitudes
of adults toward the police and are not counterintuitive. It is expected that future research will provide
additional support for these findings. Whether this is
correct of course, remains an empirical question.
Second, the sample was comprised only of public
school students. Studies should be performed that include juveniles who are not only enrolled in public
schools, but also private, vocational, and alternative
schools. Future samples might also include juveniles
who are under state custody. Perhaps the social and
economic experiences of juveniles under state custody or in private schools, may differ significantly
from other teenagers. The variables that determine
these youths attitudes may be different from the
variables found to be statistically significant in this

Y.G. Hurst, J. Frank / Journal of Criminal Justice 28 (2000) 189202

study, though early indications are that the same determinants would remain predictors (Leiber et al.,
1998). In any case, results from a more diverse sample would be much more generalizable to the attitudes of the juvenile population as a whole.

Notes
1. For a contrary finding see Frank et al. (1996) where
African Americans were found to have more positive attitudes toward the police than White respondents. This finding was attributed to the situational context of the study site.
2. The eleven attitudinal items were factor analyzed
and produced two significant factors with eigenvalues of
5.168 and 1.534. All of the remaining factors were below
.859. The attitudinal items that loaded on the first factor
were used to create the general scale, while those loading on
the second comprised the specific scale. To permit comparisons to recent research, an overall scale was also created
using all eleven attitudinal items.
3. Respondents that failed to answer any single general attitude item were deleted from the analysis (n 8).
Scale scores were summed and ranged from 4 to 20, with a
mean score of 12.13.
4. The same eight respondents that failed to answer
the general attitude items also failed to complete these
seven attitudinal statements. Scale scores ranged from 7 to
35, with a mean score of 18.9.
5. Scale scores ranged from 11 to 55 with a mean
score of 31.05.
6. Respondents that selected a response category other
than White or African American were coded as non-White.
This was done for two reasons. First, initial cross-tabulations indicated that their responses were very similar to
African Americans. Second, in the study site only African
Americans were a recognized minority for purposes of federal laws.
7. Attempts were made to collect family incomes.
Respondents were asked whether in the past year the heads
of their households had been unemployed and whether their
households had received social services such as AFDC,
food stamps, and public housing. In addition, juveniles were
asked about the highest level of education attained by either
parents or guardians with whom they currently reside. Due
to missing responses these variables were deleted from
these analyses.
8. For each variable, respondents who did not have
contact received scores of 0. In addition, respondents that
had evaluated their encounters in a direction that was contrary to the constructed variable (evaluated positively when
the variable represented negative evaluations or vice versa)
were also coded as 0 (see Dean, 1980; Frank et al., 1996;
Mastrofski, 1981).
9. More respondents indicated that they had heard
about police misconduct than had actually seen misconduct
occurring. The proportion of juveniles that responded affirmatively to the five saw police misconduct items ranged
from 24.2 percent (saw police cover up for misconduct of
fellow officers) to 68.8 percent (saw police being rude or
impolite to someone). The heard about misconduct items
ranged from 55.6 percent (police inappropriately taking
sides in an argument) to 86.3 percent (police making rude or
impolite statements).

201

10. Equations that included a confidence in the criminal

justice variable were also estimated (the results were not
presented). This variable was created by summing respondents scores on four questions and was a proxy for confidence in governmental authority. There were concerns
about whether confidence in the system was more appropriate as a dependent variable and whether it was proper to
predict confidence in the police with a measure that was
substantively similar to itself, therefore, it was deleted from
the analysis. It should be noted that when the confidence
variable was included in the regression equations, it was one
of the strongest predictors and the adjusted r-squares of the
equations increased.

References
Albrecht, S., & Green, M. (1977). Attitudes toward the police and the larger attitude complex: implications for police-community relationships. Crim 15(1), 6786.
Apple, N., & OBrien, D. (1983). Neighborhood racial composition and residents evaluation of police performance. Am Soc Rev 11, 7684.
Bell, D. J. (1979). Police and public opinion. J Police Sci &
Admin 7(2), 196205.
Boggs, S. L., & Galiher, S. F. (1965). Evaluating the police:
a comparison of Black street and household respondents. Soc Probs 13, 393406.
Brandl, S., & Horvath, F. (1991). Crime victim evaluation
of police investigative performance. J Crime & Just 19,
293305.
Brandl, S., Frank, J., Worden, R., & Bynum, T. (1994). Global and specific attitudes toward the police: disentangling the relationship. Just Quart 11, 119134.
Brandl, S., Frank, J., Wooldredge, J., & Watkins, R. C.
(1997). On the measurement of public support for the
police: a research note. Policing: An Int J of Police Strat
& Mgmt 20(3), 473480.
Brown, K., & Coulter, P. (1983). Subjective and objective
measures of police service delivery. Public Admin Rev
43, 5058.
Cao, L., Frank, J., & Cullen, F. (1996). Race, community
context, and confidence in the police. Am J Police 15(1),
322.
Clark, J., & Wenninger, E. (1964). The attitudes of juveniles toward the legal institution. J Crim Law, Crim, &
Police Sci 55, 482489.
Christenson, J., & Taylor, G. S. (1983). The socially constructed and situational context for assessment of police
services. Soc Sci Quart 63, 264274.
Dean, D. (1980). Citizen ratings of the police: the difference
police contact makes. Law & Policy Quart 2, 445471.
Decker, S. (1981). Citizen attitudes toward the police: a review of past findings and suggestions for future police. J
Police Sci & Admin 9(1), 8087.
DuBois, W. E. B. (1904). Some Notes on Negro Crime, Particularly in Georgia. Atlanta, GA: Atlanta University
Press.
Easton, D. (1965). A Framework for Political Analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Erez, E. (1984). Self-defined desert and citizens assess-

202

Y.G. Hurst, J. Frank / Journal of Criminal Justice 28 (2000) 189202

ment of the police. J Crim Law & Crim 75(4), 1276

1299.
Frank, J., Brandl, S., Cullen, F., & Stichman, A. (1996). Reassessing the impact of race on citizens attitudes toward
the police: a research note. Just Quart 13(2), 321334.
Furstenberg, F., & Wellford, C. F. (1973). Calling the police: the evaluation of police service. Law & Soc Rev 8,
393406.
Giordano, P. (1976). The sense of injustice? an analysis of juveniles reactions to the justice system. Crim 14(1), 93111.
Goldstein, H. (1987). Toward community-oriented policing:
potential, basic requirements, and threshold questions.
Crime & Del 33, 630.
Griffiths, C. T., & Winfree, L. T. (1982). Attitudes toward
the police: a comparison of Canadian and American adolescents. Int J Comp & App Crim Just 2, 127141.
Homant, R., Kennedy, D., & Fleming, R. (1984). The effect of
victimization and the police response on citizens attitudes
toward police. J Police Sci & Admin 12(3), 323327.
Jacob, H. (1971). Black and White perceptions of justice in
the city. Law & Soc Rev 5, 6989.
Koenig, D. J. (1980). The effect of crime victimization and
judicial or police contacts on public attitudes toward the
local police. J Pol Sci & Admin 8, 243249.
Leiber, M. J., Nalla, M. K., & Farnworth, M. (1998). Explaining juveniles attitudes toward the police. Just
Quart 15(1), 151173.
Mastrofski, S. (1981). Surveying clients to assess police
performance. Eval Rev 5, 397408.
Moretz, W. (1980). Kids to cops: we think youre important, but were not sure we understand you. J Police Sci
& Admin 8(2), 220224.
Murty, K., Roebuck, J., & Smith, J. (1990). The image of
the police in Black Atlanta communities. J Police Sci &
Admin 17(4), 250257.
Parks, R. B. (1984). Linking objective and subjective measures of performance. Public Admin Rev 44, 118127.
Percy, S. L. (1981). Citizen Co-production of Community
Safety and Security. Ph.D. diss. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University.
Percy, S. L. (1986). In defense of citizen evaluations as performance measures. Urban Affairs Quart 22, 6683.

Poister, T. H., & McDavid, J. C. (1978). Victims evaluation of police performance. J Crim Just 6, 133149.
Reiss, A. (1971). The Police and the Public. New Haven,
CT: Yale University Press.
Rusinko, W., Johnson, K., & Hornung, C. (1978). The importance of police contact in the formulation of youths
attitudes toward police. J Crim Just 6, 5367.
Scaglion, R., & Condon, R. (1980). Determinants of attitudes toward city police. Crim 17(4), 485494.
Skogan, W. (1991). The impact of routine encounters with
the police. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
American Society of Criminology, San Francisco, CA.
Skolnick, J. H., & Bayley, D. H. (1988). Theme and variation in community policing. In M. Tonry & N. Morris
(Eds.), Crime and Justice [Vol. 10] (pp. 137). Chicago,
IL: University of Chicago Press.
Smith, P. E., & Hawkins, R. O. (1973). Victimization, types
of police-citizen contacts, and attitudes toward the police. Law & Soc Rev 8, 135152.
Snyder, H., & Sickmund, M. (1996). Juvenile Offenders
and Victims: A National Report. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Justice.
Stipak, B. (1979). Citizen satisfaction with urban services:
potential misuse as a performance indicator. Public Admin Rev 39, 4652.
Thomas, C., & Hyman, J. (1977). Perceptions of crime, fear
of victimization, and public perceptions of police performance. J Police Sci & Admin 5(3), 305317.
Winfree, T., & Griffiths, C. (1977). Adolescent attitudes toward the police: a survey of high school students. In T. Ferdinand (Ed.), Juvenile Delinquency Little Brother Grows
Up (pp. 7999). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
White, M., & Menke, B. (1982). On assessing the mood of
the public toward the police: some conceptual issues. J
Crim Just 10, 211230.
Wycoff, M. A. (1988). The benefits of community policing:
evidence and conjecture. In J. R. Greene & S. Mastrofski (Eds.), Community Policing: Rhetoric or Reality (pp.
103120). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
Zamble, E., & Annesley, P. (1987). Some determinants of
public attitudes toward the police. J Police Sci & Admin
15(4), 285290.