Institutional Legitimacy and Procedural Justice: Reexamining the Question of Causality

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Tyler and Rasinski (1991) challenge Gibson's (1989) contention that perceptions of procedural justice do not influence citizen's compliance with unpopular Supreme Court rulings. Noting a significant correlation between procedural justice and institutional legitimacy, Tyler and Rasinski argue that perceptions of procedural justice exert indirect influence on compliance. In response, Gibson (1991) questions Tyler and Rasinski's interpretation of the causal relationships linking institutional legitimacy and perceptions of procedural justice. Although both sides in this dispute offer persuasive discussion, neither can advance conclusive empirical evidence regarding the question of causality. This note presents a reexamination of the relationship between institutional legitimacy and procedural justice, with data drawn from an experiment designed specifically to addressed the question of causality. Results do not enable conclusive assessment of the Gibson hypothesis. However, in contrast to the Tyler-Rasinski hypothesis, no evidence is found supporting the contention that perceptions of procedural justice influence perceptions of institutional legitimacy.
Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)599-608
JournalLaw and Society Review
Issue number3
StatePublished - Jan 1 1993


  • procedural justice
  • causality
  • control groups
  • variable coefficients
  • statutory interpretation
  • empirical evidence
  • politicians
  • linear regression
  • national politics
  • regression coefficients

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Institutional Legitimacy and Procedural Justice: Reexamining the Question of Causality'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this