Purpose -The literature on campus police (CP) is not as developed as mainstream or municipal police (MP). While there are several studies discussing the perception of CP, there are, however, no empirical studies investigating the perception of CP based on their legitimacy. Through the theoretical framework of liminality, this paper aims to address the literature gap by examining the perceived legitimacy of CP compared to MP. Design/methodology/approach -Data were collected through the use of survey instruments distributed among 593 college undergraduates at a doctoral extensive land grant institution in the Pacific Northwest. Since the purpose of the study was to determine student perceptions of legitimacy between MP and CP, two surveys were utilized to capture those perceptions, one for each police group respectively. The two sets of surveys were equally administered in each selected class. Findings -Through the framework of liminality, this research demonstrates the marginalization of CP as sworn law enforcement officers, especially when compared to their MP counterparts. Research limitations/implications -As this is the first study addressing the perceived legitimacy of the CP there needs to be further research in this area before substantial conclusions can be reached. Future research in this area should address the opinions of minority students, faculty and staff. Additionally, CP and MP officers themselves should be assessed to determine any potential legitimacy concerns based on perception. Originality/value -The theoretical framework reveals that the CP are trapped in a liminal state and are unable to transition into perceived legitimate police officers.
Life course theory has been used to explain why people stop committing crime and/or deviant behavior. Life course theory scholars have demonstrated important life events, such as marriage, gaining employment, or joining the military, have led to reduced recidivism; however, drug courts might also legitimately be considered a turning point for an offender. This study utilized semistructured interviews with former drug court participants (n ¼ 29) in an attempt to expand life course theory and demonstrate how drug courts should be considered a facilitator of ''turning points'' for previous criminal offenders. During the interviews, participants discussed how drug court helped them attain many important skills/ideas: self-esteem, improved relationships with family and children, a general educational development certificate, a driver's license, and/or gainful employment. A gendered analysis demonstrates women found drug court to be more useful at facilitating turning points than their male peers. Additionally, recidivism rates for the participants were lower than similarly situated offenders at the state level. While further research is needed, this study begins to advance the expansion of life course theory.
Since the inception of drug court in the late 1980s, it has become a widely used alternative to incarcerating drug offenders. Previous research has detailed the effectiveness of programming on recidivism, participants' perceptions of the service delivery model, and cost-effectiveness. The scholarship related to drug offender motivations to participate in drug court has largely discussed family obligations and the sense of loss stemming from drug abuse, and only two studies have discussed the fear of prison as a primary motivator. This research utilized semi-structured interviews with former drug court participants from a rural county in California to ascertain their motivation for engaging in drug court (N = 29). The results show 79% of participants were trying to avoid prison or jail, while 62% were motivated to end the cycle of drug abuse in their lives. The conclusion has policy implications for future drug court design; however, additional research is needed.
No abstract
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.