Youth Violence and Juvenile

Justice
http://yvj.sagepub.com/

Youth Perceptions of the Police: Identifying Trajectories

Daniel M. Stewart, Robert G. Morris and Henriikka Weir
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice published online 1 April 2013
DOI: 10.1177/1541204013480369
The online version of this article can be found at:
http://yvj.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/03/08/1541204013480369

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences

Additional services and information for Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://yvj.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://yvj.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

>> OnlineFirst Version of Record - Apr 1, 2013

What is This?

Downloaded from yvj.sagepub.com by alina ciabuca on October 20, 2013

Article

Youth Perceptions of the

Police: Identifying
Trajectories

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice

00(0) 1-18
The Author(s) 2013
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1541204013480369
yvj.sagepub.com

Daniel M. Stewart1, Robert G. Morris2, and Henriikka Weir3

Abstract
The relevance of examining juveniles attitudes toward the police has been firmly established in the
literature. Employing group-based trajectory modeling, the present study builds upon this previous
research by estimating police attitudinal trajectories among a general sample of youths. The models
produced a 5-group solution for both males and females, with four of the trajectories remaining
relatively stable over the time observed and one noticeably experiencing a downward trend.
Furthermore, of the items making up the police attitudinal scale, for several of the groups, the item
measuring prejudice most consistently oscillated away from the trajectory profile. Policy implications are discussed.
Keywords
youth, juveniles, attitudes, police

Maintaining a favorable image has been a prominent goal of the American police institution since its
public relations crisis of the 1960s and the subsequent emergence of the community policing movement, stressing positive collaborative relationships between the police and the citizenry to tackle
fear, crime, and disorder (Community Policing Consortium, 1994; Skolnick & Bayley, 1988; Walker
& Katz, 2011; Wycoff, 1988). It is theorized that a collaborative citizenry, one that is more likely to
assist the police in carrying out its core functions and serve as coproducers of protective services, is
also one that is more likely to hold favorable attitudes toward the police (Decker, 1981; Goldstein,
1987; Skolnick & Bayley, 1988; Wycoff, 1988). One group that increasingly consumes a substantial
amount of police time and resources (see Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI], 2011; Leiber, Nalla,
& Farnworth, 1998; Snyder & Sickmund, 1996; Truman, 2011; Walker & Katz, 2011) and, thus, is
an important target concerning the creation and maintenance of good public police relations is juveniles. Evidence even suggests that perceptions of legal actors, particularly police officers, can lead to
either compliance or rejection of legal and social norms among children and adolescents (Fagan &
1

University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA

University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, TX, USA
3
University of Colorado Colorado Springs
2

Corresponding Author:
Daniel M. Stewart, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA.
Email: daniel.stewart@unt.edu

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 00(0)

Tyler, 2005). Being cognizant of juveniles perceptions of the police, then, has significant practical
implications, and it is why researchers and administrators over the last few decades have shown
considerable interest in the topic (see below).
The literature on juveniles perceptions of the police, though not as extensive as that of adults
perceptions, reveals that a cornucopia of factors affect attitudes, such as race, gender, delinquency,
and the nature of police contacts, just to name a few (Brick, Taylor, & Esbensen, 2009; Geistman &
Smith, 2007; Hinds, 2007; Hurst & Frank, 2000; Hurst, Frank, & Browning, 2000; Hurst, McDermott, & Thomas, 2005; Leiber et al., 1998; Sullivan, Dunham, & Alpert, 1987; Taylor, Turner,
Esbensen, & Winfree, 2001). Very little, however, has been written on juveniles attitudes toward
the police over time (Esbensen, Osgood, Taylor, Peterson, & Freng, 2001; Esbensen, Peterson,
Taylor, & Osgood, 2012; Piquero, Fagan, Mulvey, Steinberg, & Odgers, 2005), and only one study
exists that has identified and chronicled the changes in a longitudinal capacity across distinct
attitudinal developmental groups (Piquero et al., 2005)and even this work does not exclusively
focus on attitudes toward the police.
Here, we build upon existing literature by estimating trajectories of juveniles attitudes toward
the police using the longitudinal component of the National Evaluation of the Gang Resistance
Education and Training program (G.R.E.A.T. I; Esbensen et al., 2001). The current research, after
bifurcating subjects based on sex, attempts to identify and track the course of adolescents grouped
along attitudinal levels toward the police. It further seeks to examine the mean rates of the altitudinal
scales indicators about possible trajectory profiles. Its originality and value are rooted in this distinction since this approach has infrequently been applied to juvenile attitudes toward the police and,
thus, the identification of such attitudinal developmental groups requires further exploration. By
isolating the possible different attitudinal groups and following their course, while concurrently
examining mean rates of specific indicators, we will not only be adding to the knowledge base, creating a more complete understanding of juveniles attitudes toward the police but also be providing a
springboard for future research as well as for the creation of juvenile-focused police policies that can
take into account the nuances of attitudinal development.

Attitudes and Group-Based Trajectory Modeling

Longitudinal studies in which attitudes toward the police are presented as the primary variable of interest have almost exclusively focused on adults; therefore, the empirical reality concerning juveniles
attitudes toward the police over time is comparatively unknown. The adult-focused research, however,
shows that attitudes toward the police are relatively stable with prior attitudes serving as the best
predictors of subsequent attitudes (Brandl, Frank, Worden, & Bynum, 1994; Chermak, McGarrell,
& Weiss, 2001; Gau, 2010; Rosenbaum, Schuck, Costella, Hawkins, & Ring, 2005). In the only
longitudinal study examining juveniles perceptions that has employed a similar methodology as the
one used here, it was also revealed that attitudes concerning legitimacy of law changed very little over
time (Piquero et al., 2005). These findings correspond with the various conceptions of attitudes, which
have referred to their enduring natures or settled dispositions as well as with the characterizations of
attitudes as traits with fairly permanent qualities (see Eagly & Chaiken, 1993).
Attitudes are not entirely immutable, though. Among adult populations, while not as powerful as
preexisting notions, evidence holds personal experiences play a role in attitudinal variability. For
instance, research by Gau (2010) examining respondents perceptions of police officers ability to
prevent crime revealed that, even when controlling for prior attitudes, perceptions of police contact
quality and being subjected to an unjustified stop were significant predictors. Brandl et al. (1994),
after taking into consideration prior global satisfaction, found that global attitudes of the police were
influenced by assessments of police assistance and information contacts. Even in the aforementioned
Piquero et al. (2005) research, a group of juveniles was identified whose legitimacy perceptions

Stewart et al.

dramatically increased during the period under study. Furthermore, research holds that adults hold
more favorable attitudes toward the police than juveniles (Apple & OBrien, 1983; Boggs & Galliher, 1975; Scaglion & Condon, 1980; Smith & Hawkins, 1973), evidence that over time those attitudes are indeed changing, becoming increasingly positive. In sum, though the parameters of
attitudinal ranges might be limited once formulated, evidence shows there is still room for
changeeven if it is merely a slight oscillation away from the mean.
A portion of the attitudinal stability that is observed, however, is undoubtedly a product of the
multitude of factors behind perceptions combined with limitations of the methodologies and statistical analyses employed when measuring the development of attitudes. Without providing an
exhaustive discussion of construct validity and the difficulties related to measuring change, it
should simply be noted that attitudes in general can be conceived as being the products of a complex set of factors such as beliefs, feelings, and past behaviors (see Maio, Esses, Arnold, & Olson,
2004; Zanna & Rempel, 1988), impacting individuals over a protracted period and most likely
beyond the time frame of empirical observation. By employing group-based trajectory (GBT)
modeling (aka finite mixture modeling) and utilizing a panel study design in which juveniles
attitudes toward the police are examined over a 5-year period as we do here, we can more closely
inspect the issue of attitudinal stability and increase the likelihood of capturing meaningful change
as it occurs.
It is important to note that GBT modeling has become commonplace within the criminological
literature surrounding life course transitions and behavioral development. Nagin and Land (1993)
originally popularized the technique as a means of investigating processes evolving over time or age
by isolating individuals into finite developmental groups or trajectories. While other popular
schemes used to analyze longitudinal data, such as hierarchal linear modeling (i.e., growth curve
models), assume a continuous, normal distribution of trajectories in the population, GBT modeling
makes no such parametric assumptions; rather it stresses the possibility of a limited number of
clustersgroups within the distribution that are distinguishable by similar developmental trajectories. Further, whereas standard growth curve models describe the average probability trajectory
of some development process as well as the individual variability about the mean trajectory (with
the ultimate goal entailing the identification of factors explaining such variability), GBT modeling
focuses on assigning cases to latent classes to which they have the highest probability of belonging
and subsequently identifying factors distinguishing group membership in addition to factors impacting the intercepts and slopes of development within each particular latent class (Nagin, 2005; Nagin
& Piquero, 2010). This technique has been used to explain the development of criminality across
varying stages of the life course (e.g., Bushway, Piquero, Broidy, Cauffman, & Mazzerolle,
2001; Hay & Forrest, 2006; Laub, Nagin, & Sampson, 1998; Morris, Carriaga, Diamond, Piquero,
& Piquero, 2012; Morris & Piquero, 2012; Sampson & Laub, 1993) but has rarely been used to
explore attitudes toward the police (discussed further below).
The group-based approach to juvenile attitudes toward the police is appropriate since it is
reasonable to assume that not all juvenile attitudes follow a common increasing or decreasing developmental patterncounter to processes that lend themselves more to standard growth curve models
(see Raudenbush, 2001; Warr, 2002). As mentioned previously, demographics and experiential
factors account for much of the variance surrounding favorable or unfavorable evaluations of particular issues. It makes sense then to assume that some youths will always have highly positive views
of the police, others will never hold the police in such regard, and some will develop an increasingly
positive view toward police, and for others initially positive attitudes will deteriorate (i.e., become
negative) over time. Furthermore, it is reasonable to believe that the mean rates of certain items
comprising the attitudinal scale, while consistent enough to belong to particular groups, will noticeably depart from the trajectory. The goal of this exploratory article is to identify those unique groupings and their developmental patterns.

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 00(0)

Though Piquero et al. (2005) were the first and, to the current authors knowledge, only researchers to have taken a similar methodological/statistical approach when examining juveniles attitudes
toward the police, the current research is different in a variety of ways. First, the attitudinal measures
used here exclusively pertain to the police; that is, in Piquero et al., the legitimacy scale, which was
one of their primary variables of interest, measured respondents in terms of their perceptions about
judges and the courts as well the police. Second, we observe five points of data collected annually
over a 5-year period, whereas Piquero et al. examined four repeated observations spanning only 18
months. Third, we examine a younger sample of youths, with all participants at the first wave of data
collection being 12 years of age. The average baseline age in the work of Piquero et al. was 16.04
(range 1418). And finally, although Piquero et al. examined a sample of serious adolescent offenders from two cities, here we study a more general sample of juveniles across six U.S. cities. Other
differences exist as well, but the point being illustrated here is that the current research makes a
unique and significant contribution to the literature by determining whether developmental patterns
concerning attitudes toward the police exist among a general sample of juveniles. Moreover, if
different patterns emerge, we seek to determine whether they remain stable or experience marked
change over the time observed. Finally, contingent upon the presence of discrete patterns, the current
research will analyze the variability of the items mean rates, making up the specific profiles.

Data and Method

Data
Data for the present study were culled from the longitudinal component of the G.R.E.A.T. program
(see Esbensen et al., 2001). These data provide a multi-item police attitudes scale, which is consistent across five annual waves of data collection, making them ideal for assessing attitudinal
development. The G.R.E.A.T. data were originally collected from students attending 22 middle
schools from within six U.S. cities. The original sample consisted of over 3,500 students of which
parental consent was obtained from 2,045 (57%). The original research team surveyed these students
annually from 1995 (sixth and seventh grade) through 1999. We limited our analysis to youth who
were 12 years old at Wave 1, who participated completely through the fifth wave, and who reported
to at least 4 of the 7 items regarding attitudes toward policediscussed below (n 927).
We further stratified the sample by gender in order to tease out such differences in attitudinal
development. Although gender differences in relation to police attitudes have not been conclusively
established in the literature, with one study reporting higher police perceptions among adolescent
males than females (Hurst & Frank, 2000) and others finding gender to be a relative nonfactor (Brick
et al., 2009; Chow, 2011; Griffiths & Winfree, 1982; Moretz, 1980; Winfree & Griffiths, 1977),
several pieces of research have shown gender to be directly or indirectly related to attitudes toward
the police, with adolescent females reporting more favorable perceptions of the police than males
(Bouma, 1969; Brandt & Markus, 2000; Geistman & Smith, 2007; Hurst, Frank, & Browning,
2000; Portune, 1971; Taylor, Turner, Esbensen, & Winfree, 2001). And while it is largely maintained that cultural expectations and norms produce much of the general behavioral differences
observed in males and females (Feingold, 1992; Grossman & Grossman, 1994), differentiation
between the sexes is nonetheless extant and warrants examination in this context. Moreover, this
distinction is not lost on the juvenile justice system, which in recent years has increasingly invested
in gender-specific delinquency programs (see Foley, 2008). Our sample consisted of 421 (45%)
males and 506 (55%) females.
Descriptive statistics for the youth represented in our analyses are presented in Table 1. After
partitioning the sample based on sex, we opted to include descriptive statistics on variables the literature has found to be relevant to attitudes toward the police, such as race, perceptions of safety,

Stewart et al.

Table 1. Sample Demographics by Gender.

Male

White
Black
Hispanic
Other
School environment
Delinquency
Victimization
Gang membershipa
Arrestsb
n

Female

SD

SD

0.60
0.12
0.20
0.08
2.77
19.61
5.46
0.05
0.26
421

0.49
0.33
0.40
0.28
0.27
58.81
22.92
0.21
0.92

0.55
0.14
0.19
0.12
2.72
6.68
3.11
0.03
0.07
506

0.50
0.35
0.39
0.32
0.26
19.46
15.72
0.16
0.37

Variable indicating gang membership was missing some observations (n 342 for males; n 424 for females). b Number of
arrests reported for 6 months prior to interview truncated to 10 arrests, which was generally at the 99th percentile. Number
of arrests was not collected in Waves 1 and 2.

victimization, delinquency, and arrests (Brick, Taylor, & Esbensen, 2009; Brown & Coulter, 1983;
Dean, 1980; Frank, Brandl, Cullen, & Stichman, 1996; Geistman & Smith, 2007; Homant, Kennedy,
& Fleming, 1984; Hurst & Frank, 2000; Hurst et al., 2000, 2005; Koenig, 1980; Leiber et al., 1998;
Sullivan et al., 1987; Taylor et al., 2001). As shown in Table 1, the majority of the sample for both
sexes is White (60% of males and 55% of females). And while perceptions of school safety appear to
be similar between the two groups, males report on average 3 times as many incidents of
delinquency than females. Victimization, gang membership, and number of arrests appear to be
more frequent among males than among females (see scale items).

Measurement
The G.R.E.A.T. data are rich in measures and of focus here are a series of indicators measuring
attitudes toward police. Using a 5-point Likert-type scale, respondents were asked about their level
of agreement, with higher scores indicating higher levels of agreement (i.e., more positive), to the
following statements: police officers are honest, most police officers are usually rude (reverse
coded), police officers are hardworking, most police officers are usually friendly, police
officers are usually courteous, police officers are respectful toward people like me, and
police officers are prejudiced against minority persons (reverse coded). Responses to these questions were then averaged to represent overall attitude toward police at each wave. Internal consistency
for the attitude scale was strong at each wave (a coefficients were .84, .86, .88, .87, and .89 at Waves 1
through 5). For cases missing only one wave worth of data for a given scale item, data were imputed by
taking the average response from the previous and next report when the datum was missing at Waves
2, 3, or 4, respectively. A missing datum on Wave 1 was imputed with the Wave 2 report to the same
item, and a missing datum at Wave 5 was imputed with that which was reported at Wave 4.

Analytical Procedure
This study assessed the development of attitudes toward police among high-risk youth from age 12
to age 16, relying on GBT modeling (aka finite mixture modeling). Our GBT analysis was carried
out in a series of steps that directly account for the nested nature of the data (i.e., repeated observations over time are nested within an individual). The first stage of the analysis involved

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 00(0)

approximating a longitudinal latent class analysis (LLCA), which is one form of GBT modeling
(Nagin & Land, 1993). The mathematical underpinnings of this analytical technique are covered
in more detail elsewhere (see Feldman, Masyn, & Conger, 2009). LLCA systematically classifies
the observed attitude trajectories into one group among a user-specified number of group of trajectories. It is important to note that unlike other GBTs, LLCA assumes no functional form of the
trajectory (e.g., linear, quadratic, etc.) but classifies individuals based on patterns of development.
We relied on contemporary standards for determining the final number of groups to retain, which is
the focus of the findings section presented below.

Results
Trajectory Analysis
In this study, trajectory analysis was used to model the development of attitudes toward police for a
5-year period among high-risk youth from ages 12 through 16. One of the benefits of LLCA
approach is that it does not presume any specific time function or proportional odds. Therefore,
complicated models of change can be evaluated without violating assumptions that some other
techniques may impose (Feldman et al., 2009).
The first stage of a trajectory analysis involves the decision about the appropriate number of
classes to retain in a final solution. This is usually done by using unconditional trajectory models,
which are models without covariates (see Nylund & Masyn, 2008). Model selection is typically
based on the evaluation of comparative fit indices. The final solution was based on the evaluation
of Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) statistics, posterior probabilities, class proportions,
graphically visualized mean trajectories for each class, and parsimony. Tables 2 and 3 present the
fit statistics of the 2-group, 3-group, 4-group, 5-group, and 6-group LLCA results for males and
females, respectively.
Based on a preponderance of the evidence, the 5-group model was determined as the most appropriate in representing the development of attitudes toward police from age 12 to age 16 for both
males and females, respectively. Although the 6-group solutions resulted in improved BIC, posterior
probabilities were weakened as were proportions for males. Considering this along with model
parsimony, we decided upon the 5-group solution. Based on this solution, these distinct attitudinaldevelopmental trajectory profiles were labeled as low-stable, midrange-stable, upper
mid-stable, high-stable, and midrange declining. Figures 1 and 2 display the trajectory profiles for
the five-class solutions retained, again for each gender.

Heterogeneity in Attitudes Toward the Police

The male and female trajectory profiles share several characteristics, with attitudes toward the police
tending to be stable for most youth, although at varying degrees of positivity.
Each gender is predominantly represented by individuals who have midrange (26.6% for males;
38.7% for females) or upper midrange (38.5% for males; 36.4% for females) attitudes toward police,
which tend to remain stable from 12 to 16 years of age. Both genders are also represented by a group
of juveniles who report very high attitudes toward police (10.4% of males; 8.5% of females), also
remaining stable. On the opposite end of the spectrum, there are groups of juveniles who tend to
report negative attitudes toward police (9.3% of males; 10.0% of females) across the full observation
period, and these youths attitudes tend to be relatively stable. Perhaps more interesting is that one of
the five groups, for both males and females, the midrange declining group (15.2% of males; 5.5% of
females), reports mid to mid-upper level attitudes toward police; but at about age 13, their attitudes
begin to deteriorate; and by age 16, these youth have the lowest attitudes toward police. Unlike their
more stable counterparts, the midrange decliners are considerably different with regard to

Stewart et al.

Table 2. Longitudinal Latent Class Analysis Results for Males.

BIC

Group 2
4,730.581

Group 3
4,538.843

Posterior probabilities and class proportions for

Prob.
%
Class 1
0.930
Class 2
0.949
Posterior probabilities and class proportions for
Class 1
0.935
Class 2
0.921
Class 3
0.921
Posterior probabilities and class proportions for
Class 1
0.889
Class 2
0.934
Class 3
0.890
Class 4
0.937
Posterior probabilities and class proportions for
Class 1
0.943
Class 2
0.823
Class 3
0.816
Class 4
0.938
Class 5
0.883
Posterior probabilities and class proportions for
Class 1
0.935
Class 2
0.865
Class 3
0.762
Class 4
0.833
Class 5
0.956
Class 6
0.847

Group 4
4,468.967

Group 5
4,439.928

Group 6
4,420.043

2-group model
#

3-group

4-group

5-group

6-group

50.4
49.6
model
11.9
50.1
38.0
model
38.9
10.7
39.7
10.7
model
9.3
15.2
26.6
10.4
38.5
model
9.7
33.7
7.6
13.1
9.5
26.4

212
209
50
211
160
164
45
167
45
39
64
112
44
162
41
142
32
55
40
111

Note. BIC Bayesian Information Criterion.

proportional representation between genders. Proportionally speaking, we found 2.76 times more
males in this group than females.
In sum, nearly half of males (48.9%) and more than half of females (53.4%) tend to have rather
positive outlooks toward the police, and these attitudes tend to remain stable from 12 to 16. A sizable
proportion of both genders have midrange attitudes that remain stable and a smaller group has poor
attitudes, both of which tend to remain across time. However, some youth tend to have positive
attitudes until about age 13, but then their attitudes decline rapidly through age 16. In the end, these
findings show that there is in fact considerable heterogeneity in the development of attitudes toward
the police. Most youths attitudes are consistent during this time period (i.e., they remain high if they
start high, low if they start low, etc.) though other youth tend to report degenerative attitudes about
the police as time goes on.
In an effort to extend the exploration further, we also plotted the mean levels for each specific
item underlying the attitude scale at each wave along with the estimated trajectory profile (see
Figure 2). This was done for both males and females separately. These findings suggest that for most
trajectory groups, the mean rates of specific attitude indicators fall consistently within the trajectory
profile; however, in some cases, 1 or more items tend to fall outside of the overall pattern. For example, in the low-stable male group (notated as Group 1 in Figure 2), which is the group whose
members hold the least favorable attitudes toward the police, members tend to maintain comparatively better attitudes about the police regarding the idea that the police are prejudiced toward

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 00(0)

Table 3. Longitudinal Latent Class Analysis Results for Females.

BIC

Group 2
4,964.064

Group 3
4,720.257

Posterior probabilities and class proportions for

Prob.
%
Class 1
0.911
Class 2
0.939
Posterior probabilities and class proportions for
Class 1
0.931
Class 2
0.910
Class 3
0.875
Posterior probabilities and class proportions for
Class 1
0.895
Class 2
0.870
Class 3
0.892
Class 4
0.862
Posterior probabilities and class proportions for
Class 1
0.929
Class 2
0.863
Class 3
0.839
Class 4
0.887
Class 5
0.883
Posterior probabilities and class proportions for
Class 1
0.899
Class 2
0.909
Class 3
0.858
Class 4
0.864
Class 5
0.839
Class 6
0.906

Group 4
4,645.168

Group 5
4,609.971

Group 6
4,581.032

2-group model
#

3-group

4-group

5-group

6-group

46.4
53.6
model
16.2
55.5
28.3
model
9.9
41.5
38.7
9.9
model
10.9
5.5
38.7
8.5
36.4
model
1.2
13.8
36.8
34.6
6.1
7.5

235
271
82
281
143
50
210
196
50
55
28
196
43
184
6
70
186
175
31
38

Note. BIC Bayesian Information Criterion.

minorities. Males in the high-stable group (those with the most positive attitudes toward police) are
fairly consistent across items; however, it is interesting that the prejudice item is clearly the lowest
ranking item. In other words, these youth have positive attitudes toward the police, but the aspect
about the police that generates the most negativity has to do with prejudice.
For females in the low-stable group, respondents had comparatively more agreement with the
statement about police being hardworking. And somewhat similar to that of males, as the same group
members got older, their perceptions of police prejudice improved as well; that is, they increasingly
viewed the police as less prejudiced. Also like their male counterparts, the two female groups with
the most positive attitudes toward the police consistently ranked the police prejudice item lower than
other attitudinal items (Figures 2 and 3).

Discussion and Conclusion

The emphasis on gauging public perceptions of the police sprouted from movements aimed at
improving relationships between the police and the community. Juveniles have long been a segment
of the community that experiences frequent encounters with the policeand because of the discretionary nature of policing, in many cases police officers are the only agents of the criminal justice
system with whom juveniles come into contact (Caldwell & Black, 1971; Cavan & Ferdinand,
1975). Consequently, these contacts can be extremely valuable in forming the basis for future

Stewart et al.

Females

Development of Attitudes Toward Police (Ages 12-16, n=506)

12

13

14
Age
Class 1, 10.%
Class 3, 38.7%
Class 5, 36.4%

15

16

Class 2, 5.5%
Class 4, 8.5%

Males

Development of Attitudes Toward Police (Ages 12-16, n=421)

12

13

14
Age
Class 1, 9.3%
Class 3, 26.6%
Class 5, 38.5%

15

16

Class 2, 15.2%
Class 4, 10.4%

Figure 1. Trajectories of attitudes toward police: males and females.

policecommunity relations (Winfree & Griffiths, 1977). The importance of maintaining a positive
police image in the eyes of juveniles as well as studying juveniles attitudes toward the police then
cannot be overstated.
While previous research has mostly examined juveniles perceptions of law enforcement in crosssectional capacities, this study adds to the scant literature devoted to examining juveniles attitudes

10

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 00(0)

of the police over time. Using the LLCA approach to GBT modeling, a 5-group model was retained
from data produced by the national evaluation of G.R.E.A.T. for both males and females. The results
revealed that most respondents held relatively favorable attitudes toward the police, with four of the
groups from each gender remaining relatively stable over the time observed. That is, those juveniles
that started off with high baseline attitudes also ended the period of observation with high attitudes.
The findings of relative stability correspond to those in the police attitudinal literature concerning
adults, with most longitudinal designs focusing on adults attitudes toward the police demonstrating
a comparative degree of constancy over time (Brandl et al., 1994; Chermak et al., 2001; Gau, 2010;
Rosenbaum et al., 2005). The degree of stability and number of groups retained was also similar to
the findings of Piquero et al. (2005) wherein they retained five groups when examining individuals
perceptions of legitimacy of law. But unlike these studies, we employed GBT modeling and identified unique attitudinal groupings among a general sample of juveniles, allowing us for the first time
to conclude based on empirical evidence that not all juvenile attitudes exclusively pertaining to the
police follow a common increasing or decreasing trajectory.
Although extending well beyond the scope of the G.R.E.A.T. I data, future projects could entail
panel studies wherein participants are followed into adulthood. Such an approach would provide a
more holistic picture of attitudinal development and one wherein specific shifts in trajectories could
be identified that possibly comport with significant life events. For instance, the extant literature
demonstrates that juveniles hold the police in lower regard than adults (Apple & OBrien, 1983;
Boggs & Galliher, 1975; Scaglion & Condon, 1980; Smith & Hawkins, 1973) and that even younger
adults have less favorable attitudes about the police than older adults (Murphy & Worrall, 1999;
Nofziger & Williams, 2005; Schafer, Huebner, & Bynum, 2003; Weitzer & Tuch, 2002). By extending the time period under study, researchers might be able to identify when and how the trajectories
begin their lasting upward trends. Perhaps groups differ in response to graduating college, obtaining
career employment, getting married, or having children. The period of observation in the current
study only surveys juveniles from the ages 12 to 16.
Our finding that males held the police in lower regard than females do, albeit slightly, comports
with the bulk of the literature showing more positive attitudes toward the police among females than
males (Bouma, 1969; Brandt & Markus, 2000; Geistman & Smith, 2007; Hurst et al., 2000; Portune,
1971; Taylor et al., 2001). Further, the mid-declining group (Group 2), the group from each sex that
started at a moderate level but dropped precipitously at around age 13, contained a greater percentage of males (15.2%) than females (5.5%). Such disparities in attitudes between the sexes are often
explained by the nature of police contacts, with positive contacts (i.e., assistance, providing information, etc.) producing positive perceptions of the police and negative contacts (i.e., invocation
of social control) detrimentally impacting attitudes toward the police (Brown & Benedict, 2002;
Smith, Graham, & Adams, 1991; Worrall, 1999). A specific type of contact that produces negative
sentiments, among juveniles as well as adults, is arrest (Brick et al., 2009; Smith & Hawkins, 1973);
and since males make up over two thirds of juvenile arrests (Puzzanchera & Adams, 2011; Snyder,
2008), the differential in male and female attitudes found here is not too surprising. In fact, male
respondents in the current sample reported more arrests on average than females. Further, it could
be that the members of the low-stable and mid-declining group for both sexes experienced a greater
incidence and/or frequency of arrests than members of other groups.
Delinquency is another factor that could be producing the modest variance in attitudes toward
police between the sexes. Males consistently report more delinquent acts than females (Canter,
1982; Sampson, 1985; Snyder & Sickmund, 2006; White & LaGrange, 1987), as they did here in
the current samplea possible indicator, along with arrests, of adhering to subcultures with distinguishable values that stress hostility toward authority figures (see Anderson, 1999; Cohen, 1955;
Cloward & Ohlin, 1960; Miller, 1958). Brick et al. (2009) found that, after controlling for serious
delinquency, initial differences between the sexes concerning attitudes toward the police

Stewart et al.

11

Figure 2. Group attitude trajectory by specific question: males.

disappeared. Although the current study exclusively focuses on identifying trajectories and describing them in terms of the sole demographic of sex, our future research aims at identifying other factors that distinguish group membership, giving particular attention to arrests, delinquency,
victimization, and race. All of which, in cross-sectional studies, have been shown to affect juveniles
attitudes toward the police (Brick et al., 2009; Geistman & Smith, 2007; Hurst & Frank, 2000; Hurst
et al., 2000, 2005; Leiber et al., 1998; Sullivan et al., 1987; Taylor et al., 2001).
The discovery of the mid-declining group is noteworthy because its trajectory illustrates a particular point in time wherein attitudes significantly shift downwardbetween the ages of 12 and 13. In
fact, among females, members of this group held the lowest perceptions of the policeeventually

12

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 00(0)

Figure 3. Group attitude trajectory by specific question: females.

dipping below the low- and middle-stable groups. Regardless of the particular factors behind this
descending trend, an important implication of this finding is the necessity for early intervention. And
since the literature demonstrates a relationship between delinquency and attitudes toward the police
(Brick et al., 2009; Cox & Falkenberg, 1987; Leiber et al., 1998), predelinquent intervention
programs already in place could be utilized to shore up attitudes toward the police with the value
addition of producing a more collaborative citizen in adulthood. Practitioners looking for solutions
to poor policejuvenile relations, then, would do well to research to the numerous promising intervention programs identified by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention currently
carried out in schools and communities (Loeber, Farrington, & Petechuk, 2003). These programs,

Stewart et al.

13

which entail a variety of curricula such as classroom and behavior management, conflict resolution
and violence prevention, anti-bullying directives, mentoring, and afterschool recreation, can be
adapted to include instruction conducive to prosocial attitudes toward the police. Police Athletic
Leagues, which have chapters all across the country, already incorporate such practices in their
programming, with one of their goals being developing strong positive attitudes toward the police
(National Association of Police Athletic/Activities Leagues, Inc., 2013). The G.R.E.A.T. program,
whose evaluation provided the data used here, is another such program that focuses on prevention.
Its antigang and delinquency message is delivered in schools directly by school resource officers and
police officers, with the aim of developing positive relations with law enforcement. Cross-sectional
as well as longitudinal evaluations of the program have suggested that many participants end up having more positive attitudes toward the police than nonparticipants (Esbensen & Osgood, 1999;
Esbensen et al., 2001; Esbensen, Peterson, Taylor, & Osgood, 2012). Finally, an evaluation of the
Drug Abuse Resistance Education (D.A.R.E.) program, from which G.R.E.A.T. was loosely
modeled, revealed that police officers who provided the instruction received better evaluations than
nonpolice officer instructors (Hammond et al., 2008).
The discovery of visible differentials between individual items making up the attitudinal scale
is important, as wellparticularly the finding concerning the prejudice item. Recall that, although
the members making up the groups with the most positive attitudes toward the police (Groups 4
and 5) consistently rated the police on all attitudinal items higher than members of the groups with
the worst attitudes of the police, in relation to the mean scores on other items within the group, the
item measuring prejudice among Groups 4 and 5 was consistently the lowest, for both sexes (with
lower scores indicating higher perceptions of police prejudice). The opposite was true for the
groups with the least favorable attitudes toward the police, however (i.e., those group members
consistently rated the police less prejudiced in relation to other itemsGroups 1 and 2 for males).
This seemingly perplexing finding could be due to police contact, with members of higher attitudinal groups possibly having little contact with the police and basing their perceptions on external
sources as to how the police typically interact with monitories. The groups with lower attitudes,
though, possibly because their members have experienced a greater degree of police contact and
thus are more directly knowledgeable of the reality of police officer behavior, might be contending
that, even though they are comparatively dissatisfied with the police, the police are not racially
biased in the commission of their dutiesparticularly in relation to other officer behaviors.
Research does show that aspects of citizen demeanor are better indicators of police behavior
toward citizens than race and class (Black, 1971; Mastrofski, Reisig, & McCluskey, 2002; Piliavin
& Briar, 1964). Regardless of the reason, these particular findings have implications for the field
of procedural justice. The theory of procedural justice maintains that public perceptions of fairness
of the criminal justice system and respect for the law are inextricably intertwined with perceived
legitimacy and, ultimately, willingness to comply with the law (Tyler, 1990, 2007; Tyler & Huo,
2002). Believing that the police are prejudiced, then, more than likely, compromises conceptions
of fairness and respect, increasing the chances of delinquency. When attempting to build police
youth relationships, police officials should pay particular attention to youths notions of racial
discrimination.
As with any social scientific endeavor, replication is necessary to ensure a more complete understanding of the phenomena under study as well as prior to committing to any consequential public
policy. For example, it is important to discover whether these trajectories would emerge using other
populations. Nonetheless, administrators should look to the aforementioned intervention programs
as viable options for developing cordial relationships between the police and juveniles that can continue into adulthood. With the identification of different developmental trajectories, however, it is
evident that a one-size-fits-all approach might be ineffective. In future research, it is our intention
to identify factors determining group membership as well as factors associated with developmental

14

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 00(0)

patterns themselves. The current study, then, can be viewed as a first step in understanding how juveniles attitudes toward the police develop as they age.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article

References
Anderson, E. (1999). Code of the street: Decency, violence, and the moral life of the inner city. New York, NY:
W. W. Norton.
Apple, N., & OBrien, D. (1983). Neighborhood racial composition and residents evaluation of police performance. American Sociological Review, 11, 7684.
Black, D. (1971). The social organization of arrest. Stanford Law Review, 23, 10871111.
Boggs, S. L., & Galliher, S. F. (1975). Evaluating the police: A comparison of black street and household
respondents. Social Problems, 13, 393406.
Bouma, D. H. (1969). Kids and cops. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans.
Brandl, S. G., Frank, J., Worden, R. E., & Bynum, T. S. (1994). Global and specific attitudes toward the police:
Disentangling the relationship. Justice Quarterly, 11, 119134.
Brandt, D. E., & Markus, K. A. (2000). Adolescent attitudes towards the police: A new generation. Journal of
Police and Criminal Psychology, 15, 1016.
Brick, B. T., Taylor, T. J., & Esbensen, F.-A. (2009). Juvenile attitudes towards the police: The importance of
subcultural involvement and community ties. Journal of Criminal Justice, 37, 488495.
Brown, B., & Benedict, W. R. (2002). Perceptions of the police: Past findings, methodological issues, conceptual issues and policy implications. Policing, 25, 543580.
Brown, K., & Coulter, P. (1983). Subjective and objective measures of police service delivery. Public
Administration Review, 43, 5058.
Bushway, S. D., Piquero, A. R., Broidy, L. M., Cauffman, E., & Mazerolle, P. (2001). An empirical framework
for studying desistance as a process. Criminology, 39, 491515.
Caldwell, R. G., & Black, J. A. (1971). Juvenile delinquency. New York, NY: Ronald Press.
Canter, R. J. (1982). Sex differences in self-report delinquency. Criminology, 20, 373394.
Cavan, R. C., & Ferdinand, T. N. (1975). Juvenile delinquency. Philadelphia, PA: J.B. Lippincott.
Chermak, S., McGarrell, E. F., & Weiss, A. (2001). Citizens perceptions of aggressive traffic enforcement
strategies. Justice Quarterly, 18, 365391.
Chow, H. P. H. (2011). Adolescent attitudes toward the police in a western Canadian city. Policing, 34,
638653.
Cloward, R. A., & Ohlin, L. E. (1960). Delinquency and opportunity: A theory of delinquent gangs. New York,
NY: Free Press.
Cohen, A. K. (1955). Delinquent boys: The culture of the gang. New York, NY: Free Press.
Community Policing Consortium. (1994). Understanding community policing: A framework for action.
Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Cox, T. C., & Falkenberg, S. D. (1987). Adolescents attitudes toward the police: An emphasis on interactions
between the delinquency measures of alcohol and marijuana, police contacts and attitudes. American
Journal of Police, 6, 4562.
Dean, D. (1980). Citizen ratings of the police: The difference police contact makes. Law and Policy Quarterly,
2, 445471.

Stewart et al.

15

Decker, S. (1981) Citizen attitudes toward the police. A review of past findings and suggestions for future
police. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 9, 8087.
Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,
Inc.
Esbensen, F.-A., & Osgood, D. W. (1999). Gang resistance education and training (GREAT): Results from the
national evaluation. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 36, 194225.
Esbensen, F.-A., Osgood, D. W., Taylor, T. J., Peterson, D., & Freng, A. (2001). How great is G.R.E.A.T?
Results from a longitudinal quasi-experimental design. Criminology & Public Policy, 1, 87118.
Esbensen, F.-A., Peterson, D., Taylor, T. J., & Osgood, D. W. (2012). Results from a multi-site evaluation of the
G.R.E.A.T. program. Justice Quarterly, 29, 125151.
Fagan, J., & Tyler, T. R. (2005). Legal socialization of children and adolescents. Social Justice Research, 18,
217242.
Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2011). Ten-year arrest trends. Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/
cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl32.xls
Feingold, A. (1992). Sex differences in variability in intellectual abilities: A new look at an old controversy.
Review of Educational Research, 62, 6184.
Feldman, B. J., Masyn, K. E., & Conger, R. D. (2009). New approaches to studying problem behaviors: A
comparison of methods for modeling longitudinal, categorical adolescent drinking data. Developmental
Psychology, 43, 652676.
Foley, A. (2008). The current state of gender-specific delinquency programming. Journal of Criminal Justice,
36, 262269.
Frank, J., Brandl, S., Cullen, F. T., & Stichman, A. (1996). Reassessing the impact of race on citizens attitudes
toward the police: A research note. Justice Quarterly, 13, 321334.
Gau, J. M. (2010). A longitudinal analysis of citizens attitudes about police. Policing, 33, 236252.
Geistman, J., & Smith, B. W. (2007). Juvenile attitudes toward police: A national study. Journal of Crime and
Justice, 30, 2751.
Goldstein, H. (1987). Toward community-oriented policing: Potential, basic requirements, and threshold
questions. Crime & Delinquency, 33, 610.
Griffiths, C. T., & Winfree, L. T. (1982). Attitudes toward the police: A comparison of Canadian and American
adolescents. Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 6, 128141.
Grossman, H., & Grossman, S. H. (1994). Gender issues in education. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Hammond, A., Sloboda, Z., Tonkin, P., Stephens, R., Teasdale, B., Grey, S. F., & Williams, J. (2008). Do
adolescents perceive police officers as credible instructors of substance abuse prevention programs? Health
Education Research, 23, 682696.
Hay, C., & Forrest, W. (2006). The development of self-control: Examining self-control theorys stability
thesis. Criminology, 44, 739774.
Hinds, L. (2007). Building police-youth relationships: The importance of procedural justice. Youth Justice, 7,
195209.
Homant, R., Kennedy, D., & Flemming, R. (1984). The effect of victimization and the police response on
citizens attitudes toward police. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 12, 323332.
Hurst, Y. G., & Frank, J. (2000). How kids view cops: The nature of juvenile attitudes toward the police.
Journal of Criminal Justice, 28, 189202.
Hurst, Y. G., Frank, J., & Browning, S. L. (2000). The attitudes of juveniles toward the police. Policing, 23, 3753.
Hurst, Y. G., McDermott, M. J., & Thomas, D. L. (2005). The attitudes of girls toward the police: Differences
by race. Policing, 28, 578593.
Koenig, D. J. (1980). The effect of crime victimization and judicial or police contacts on public attitudes toward
the local police. Journal of Police Science & Administration, 8, 243249.
Laub, J. H., Nagin, D. S., & Sampson, R. J. (1998). Trajectories of change in criminal offending: Good
marriages and the desistance process. American Sociological Review, 63, 225238.

16

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 00(0)

Leiber, M. J., Nalla, M. K., & Farnworth, M. (1998). Explaining juveniles attitudes toward the police. Justice
Quarterly, 15, 151174.
Loeber, R., Farrington, D. P., & Petechuk, D. (2003). Child delinquency: Early intervention and prevention.
Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
Maio, G. R., Esses, V. M., Arnold, K. H., & Olson, J. M. (2004). The function-structure model of attitudes:
Incorporating the need for affect. In G. Haddock & G. R. Maio (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives on the
psychology of attitudes (pp. 933). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
Mastrofski, S., Reisig, M., & McCluskey, J. (2002). Police disrespect toward the public: An encounter-based
analysis. Criminology, 40, 519551.
Miller, J. (1958). Lower-class culture as generating milieu of gang delinquency. Journal of Social Issues, 14,
519.
Moretz, W. (1980). Kids to cops: We think youre important, but were not sure we understand you. Journal of
Police Science and Administration, 8, 220224.
Morris, R. G., Carriaga, M. L., Diamond, B., Leeper-Piquero, N., & Piquero, A. R. (2012). Does prison strain
lead to prison misconduct? An application of general strain theory. Journal of Criminal Justice, 40,
194201.
Morris, R. G., & Piquero, A. R. (2012). For whom do sanctions deter and label? Justice Quarterly. doi:10.1080/
07418825.2011.633543
Murphy, D. W., & Worrall, J. L. (1999). Residency requirements and public perceptions of the police in large
municipalities. Policing, 22, 327342.
Nagin, D. S. (2005). Group-based modeling and development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Nagin, D. S., & Land, K. C. (1993). Age, criminal careers, and population heterogeneity: Specification and
estimation of a nonparametric, mixed Poisson model. Criminology, 31, 327362.
Nagin, D. S., & Piquero, A. R. (2010). Using the group-based trajectory model to study crime over the life
course. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 21, 105116.
National Association of Police Athletic/Activities Leagues, Inc. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.nationalpal.org
Nofziger, S., & Williams, L. S. (2005). Perceptions of police and safety in a small town. Police Quarterly, 8,
248270.
Nylund, K. L., & Masyn, K. E. (2008). Covariates and latent class analysis: Results of a simulation study. Paper
presented at the Society for Prevention Research Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA.
Piliavin, I., & Briar, S. (1964). Police encounters with juveniles. American Journal of Sociology, 70,
206214.
Piquero, A. R., Fagan, J., Mulvey, E. P., Steinberg, L., & Odgers, C. (2005). Developmental trajectories of legal
socialization among serious adolescent offenders. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 96, 267298.
Portune, R. (1971). Changing adolescent attitudes toward the police: A practical sourcebook for schools and
police departments. Cincinnati, OH: W.H. Anderson and Company.
Puzzanchera, C., & Adams, B. (2011). Juvenile arrests 2009. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention.
Raudenbush, S. W. (2001). Comparing personal trajectories and drawing causal inferences from longitudinal
data. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 501525.
Rosenbaum, D. P., Schuck, A. M., Costello, S. K., Hawkins, D. F., & Ring, M. K. (2005). Attitudes toward the
police: The effects of direct and vicarious experiences. Police Quarterly, 8, 343365.
Sampson, R. J. (1985). Sex differences in self-reported delinquency and official records: A multiple-group
structural modeling approach. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1, 345367.
Sampson, R. J., & Laub, J. H. (2003). Life-course desisters? Trajectories of crime among delinquent boys
followed to age 70. Criminology, 42, 555592.
Scaglion, R., & Condon, R. (1980). Determinants of attitudes toward city police. Criminology, 17, 485494.

Stewart et al.

17

Schafer, J. A., Huebner, B. M., & Bynum, T. S. (2003). Citizen perceptions of police services: Race, neighbourhood context, and community policing. Police Quarterly, 6, 440468.
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. 127). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Smith, D. A., Graham, N., & Adams, B. (1991). Minorities and the police: Attitudinal and behavior questions.
In M. J. Lynch & E. B. Patterson (Eds.), Race and criminal justice (pp. 2225). Albany, NY: Harrow and
Heston Publishers.
Smith, P. E., & Hawkins, R. O. (1973). Victimization, types of police-citizen contacts, and attitudes toward the
police. Law & Society Review, 8, 135152.
Snyder, H. N. (2008). Juvenile arrests 2006. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention.
Snyder, H., & Sickmund, M. (1996). Juvenile offenders and victims: A national report. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Justice.
Snyder, H., & Sickmund, M. (2006). Juvenile offenders and victims: 2006 national report. Washington, DC: U.
S. Department of Justice.
Sullivan, P. R., Dunham, R., & Alpert, G. (1987). Age structure of different ethnic groups concerning police.
The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 78, 177196.
Taylor, T. J., Turner, K. B., Esbensen, F.-A., & Winfree, L. T. Jr. (2001). Coppin an attitude: Attitudinal
differences among juveniles toward the police. Journal of Criminal Justice, 29, 295305.
Truman, J. L. (2011). Criminal victimization, 2010. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
Tyler, T. R. (1990). Why people obey the law. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Tyler, T. R. (Ed.). (2007). Legitimacy and criminal justice: International perspectives. New York, NY: Russell
Sage Foundation.
Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. J. (2002). Trust in the law: Encouraging public cooperation with the police and courts.
New York, NY: Russell Sage.
Walker, S., & Katz, C. (2011). The police in America: An introduction (7th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Warr, M. (2002). Companions in crime: The social aspects of criminal conduct. New York, NY: Cambridge
University Press.
Weitzer, R., & Tuch, S. A. (2002). Perceptions of racial profiling: Race, class, and personal experience.
Criminology, 40, 435457.
White, H. R., & LaGrange, R. L. (1987). An assessment of gender effects in self report delinquency. Sociological Focus, 20, 195213.
Winfree, L. T., Jr., & Griffiths, C. T. (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.
Worrall, J. L. (1999). Public perceptions of police efficacy and image: The fuzziness of support of support
for the police. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 24, 4766.
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.
Zanna, M. P., & Rempel, J. K. (1988). Attitudes: A new look at an old concept. In D. Bar-Tal & A. W. Kruglanski
(Eds.), The social psychology of knowledge (pp. 315334). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Author Biographies
Daniel M. Stewart is an assistant professor in the Department of Criminal Justice at the University
of North Texas. His current research interests include policing, organizational behavior, and sentencing policy.

18

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 00(0)

Robert G. Morris, PhD, is an Associate Professor of Criminology and a Director of the Center for
Crime and Justice Studies at the University of Texas at Dallas. His research encompasses contemporary issues in criminal justice and criminology and has been published in journals such as Justice
Quarterly, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, Crime and Delinquency, Criminal Justice and
Behavior, and Intelligence.
Henriikka Weir is an assistant professor of criminal justice at University of Colorado Colorado
Springs as well as a former police officer. Her research interests include policing, substance abuse,
child maltreatment, violence, and biosocial criminology.