Abstract:
This thesis examines whether a citizen’s gender predicts the amount of procedural
justice that he or she is shown by an officer during a police-citizen encounter. Possible
gender effects are examined in the context of the chivalry and the selective chivalry
hypotheses in order to determine whether females are shown more procedurally just
treatment than males and whether a female citizen’s treatment by police is contingent
upon her conformity to traditional gender norms. Using multiple linear regression to
analyze data collected during systematic social observations of 243 police-citizen
interactions, no evidence of a significant gender effect on officers’ procedural justice
decision making was revealed. It was found, however, that a citizen’s minority status,
involvement in an encounter with a service-related primary problem, and negative
attitude toward police at the beginning of an interaction all have a significant negative
impact on procedural justice. Consideration of these results and of the predictors’ effects
on the individual elements of procedural justice suggests that chivalry theory may not be
applicable to procedural justice decision-making; that service-related encounters do not
offer as many opportunities for officers to show neutrality as do other encounters; and
that minority citizens do not benefit from as neutral of decision-making by the agents of
the criminal justice system as do their White, non-Hispanic counterparts.
