Police authority supposedly guides the actions of police officers. This article reconstructs personal theories on the authority of police by means of qualitative interviews with German police officers and police candidates. These personal theories are divided into four self-schemata composed of: dealing effectively and preferably with possible problems occurring with police work; different normative orders that define the relationship between the police and civil society; a reference to desirable personality traits for police officers; and symbolic representations of police authority. Such self-schemata influence police interactions with citizens and disclose a diversity of police ideas about authority. The different self-schemata of authority seem to originate from different backgrounds such as practical experience of policing, formal education in police colleges, compliance with commonly accepted societal norms like fairness, non-violence, respect and personal convictions. It is discussed how these self-schemata can be constructively reflected in formal police education in Germany. This article contributes to a nuanced understanding of police authority and how this might be integrated into training. Further research should investigate how these schemata can be integrated into a dynamic model and carry out a comparative, intercultural analysis of these personal theories.
AlonNOmerH (2006) The Psychology of Demonization: Promoting Acceptance and Reducing Conflict. Mawah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
2.
AlpertGPDunhamRG (2004) Understanding Police Use of Force. Officers, Suspects, and Reciprocity. Cambridge: University Press.
3.
AlpertGPDunhamRG (2010) Overview of findings from a comprehensive national study policy and training recommendations related to police use of CEDs. Police Quarterly13(3): 235–259.
4.
AlpertGPMacDonaldJM (2001) Police use of force: an analysis of organizational characteristics. Justice Quarterly18(2): 393–409.
5.
AltemeyerB (1981) Right-wing Authoritarianism. Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada: University of Manitoba Press.
6.
BanduraA (1990) Perceived self-efficacy in the exercise of control over AIDS infection. Evaluation and Program Planning13(1): 9–17.
7.
BlackD (1980) The Manners and Customs of the Police. New York: Academic Press.
8.
BlauP (1964) Exchange of Power in Social Life. New York: Wiley.
9.
BoxerPBrunsonRKGaylord-HardenN, et al. (2021) Addressing the inappropriate use of force in the United States and beyond: a behavioral and social science perspective. Aggressive Behavior47(5): 502–512.
10.
CharmazK (2014) Constructing Grounded Theory. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
11.
CockroftT (2017) Police culture: histories, orthodoxies, and new horizons. Policing. A Journal of Policy and Practice11(3): 229–235.
12.
CollinsR (2008) Violence. A Micro-sociological Theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
13.
CollinsR (2011) Dynamik der Gewalt. Hamburg: Hamburger Edition.
14.
Costa JrPTMcCraeRR (1992) Four ways five factors are basic. Personality and Individual Differences13(6): 653–665.
15.
DuckittJSibleyCG (2010) Personality, ideology, prejudice, and politics: a dual-process motivational model. Journal of Personality78(6): 1861–1894.
16.
EitleDStolzenbergLD’AlessioSJ (2005) Police organizational factors, the racial composition of the police, and the probability of arrest. Justice Quarterly22(1): 30–57.
17.
FeltesTKlukkertAOhlemacherT (2007) “…und dann habe ich ihm auch schon eine geschmiert.” Autoritätserhalt und Eskalationsangst als Ursachen polizeilicher Gewaltausübung. Monatsschrift für Kriminologie und Strafrechtsreform90(4): 285–303.
18.
ForstR (2013) Zum Begriff eines Rechtfertigungsnarrativs. Normative Orders Working Paper. Cluster of Excellence the Formation of Normative Orders. Goethe Universität Frankfurt am Main.
19.
FreitagMSchophausM (eds) (2017) Reflexive Polizei. Vermittlung von Reflexionskompetenz im Hochschulstudium. Frankfurt: Verlag für Polizeiwissenschaft.
20.
GauJMPaolineEA (2021) Police Officers’ self-assessed legitimacy: a theoretical extension and empirical test. Justice Quarterly38(2): 276–300.
21.
GiladZRaz-RotemMHarpazA, et al. (2024) Implementing a constructive struggle approach: insights from a training program for security forces prior to executing a government evacuation policy in the context of a protracted conflict. Conflict Resolution Quarterly41(3): 269–279.
22.
GoffmanE (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Double Day.
23.
GroebenNScheeleB (2018) Forschungsprogramm subjektive theorien. Zur psychologie des reflexiven subjekts. In: MayGMruckK (eds) Handbuch Qualitative Forschung in der Psychologie. Springer Reference Psychologie. Wiesbaden: Springer, 151–165.
24.
GroebenNWahlDSchleeJ, et al. (1988) Forschungsprogramm Subjektive Theorien. Eine Einführung in die Psychologie des reflexiven Subjekts. Tübingen: Francke.
HunoldD (2012) Polizeiliche Zwangsanwendungen gegenüber Jugendlichen-Innen-und Außenperspektiven. In: OhlemacherTWernerJT (eds) Empirische Polizeiforschung XIV: Polizei und Gewalt. Interdisziplinäre Analysen zu Gewalt gegen und durch Polizeibeamte. Frankfurt am Main: Verlag für Polizeiwissenschaft, 107–128.
27.
HunoldDOberwittlerDLukasT (2016) ‘I’d like to see your identity cards please’ – Negotiating authority in police–adolescent encounters: findings from a mixed-method study of proactive police practices towards adolescents in two German cities. European Journal of Criminology13(5): 590–609.
28.
Jonathan-ZamirTLitmanovitzYHavivN (2023) What works in police training? Applying an evidence-informed, general. Ecological Model of Police Training. Police Quarterly26(3): 279–306.
29.
KellyGA (1955) The Psychology of Personal Constructs. London: Routledge.
30.
KindermannKRiegelU (2016) Subjektive Theorien von Lehrpersonen. Variationen und methodische Modifikationen eines Forschungsprogramms [51 Absatze]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research17(2): Art. 1.
31.
KlausLAbdul-RahmanL (2021) Polizeiliche Gewaltanwendung im Spannungsfeld von Autoritätsanspruch und Verhältnismäßigkeit. Polizei/Wissen01(2021): 19–23.
32.
KleppestøTHEftedalNHThomsenL (2020) Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). In: ShackelfordTWeekes-ShackelfordV (eds) Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science. Cham: Springer, 1–9.
33.
KoernerSStallerMSZaiserB (2023) Policing in the light of social dominance theory and social distance theory of power. In: StallerMSKoernerSZaiserB (eds) Police Conflict Management Volume I. Cham Switzerland: Springer Nature, 61–84.
34.
KörnerBLemmeMOfnerS, et al. (eds) (2019) Neue Autorität. Das Handbuch. Konzeptionelle Grundlagen, aktuelle Anwendungsfelder und neue Anwendungsgebiete. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
35.
LemmeMKörnerB (2018) Neue Autorität in Haltung und Handlung. Heidelberg: Carl Auer.
36.
LitmanovitzY, 2016. Moving towards an evidence-based of democratic police training: The development and evaluation of a complex social intervention in the Israeli Border Police. Doctoral dissertation, Oxford University.
37.
MacLeanKAlpertG (2021) The changing role of American police in the era of George Floyd. Polizei/Wissen1(2021): 27–30.
38.
MacLeanKWolfeSERojekJ, et al. (2020) Randomized controlled trial of social interaction police training. Criminology & Public Policy19(3): 805–832.
39.
MarkusH (1977) Self-schemata and processing information about the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology35(2): 63–78.
40.
MazerolleLTerrillW (2018) Making every police–citizen interaction count. The challenges of building a better cop. Criminology & Public Policy17(1): 89–96.
41.
MyhillABradfordB (2013) Overcoming cop culture? Organizational justice and police officers’ attitudes toward the public. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management36(2): 338–356.
42.
NixJWolfeSRojekJ, et al. (2015) Trust in the police: the influence of procedural justice and percieved collective efficacy. Crime and Delinquency61(4): 610–640.
43.
OberwittlerDRocheS (2022) How institutional contexts shape police-adolescent encounters. Astudy of France and Germany. Policing and Society32(3): 378–410.
44.
OmerHvon SchlippeA (2010) Stärke statt Macht. Neue Autorität in Familie, Schule und Gemeinde. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
45.
PaolineETerrillW (2007) Police education, experience and the use of force. Criminal Justice and Behavior34(2): 179–196.
46.
ParentRParentC (2023) Analyzing the use of deadly force by police in Canada and the United States. In: AlbrechtJden HeyerJ (eds) Police Use of Force Global Perspectives and Policy Implications. Cham: Springer, 3–19.
47.
PascheNPinheiroEKochM (2018) “Wir sind die Polizei. Das Schlusswort haben wir.” Un(doing) authority in einem Schweizer Polizeidienst. In: MenschingAJacobsenA (eds) Polizei im Spannungsfeld von Autorität, Legitimität und Kompetenz. Frankfurt: Verlag für Polizeiwissenschaft, 41–59.
48.
PatersonC (2015) Higher education, police training, and police reform: a review of police-academic educational collaborations. In: KratcoskiPCEdelbacherM (eds) Collaborative Policing: Police, Academics, Professionals, and Communities Working Together for Education, Training, and Program Implementation. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 119–136.
49.
PopitzH (1992) Phänomene der Macht. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
50.
PóschKJacksonJBradfordB, et al. (2021) Truly free consent”? Clarifying the nature of police legitimacy using causal analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology17(4): 563–595.
51.
RauchsteinM (2017) Beschränkte Handlungsspielräume für reflexives Handeln in der Polizei. In: FreitagMSchophausM (eds) Reflexive Polizei. Vermittlung von Reflexionskompetenz im Hochschulstudium. Frankfurt: Verlag für Polizeiwissenschaft, 153–168.
52.
ReinerR (2016) Is police culture cultural?Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice11(3): 236–241.
53.
SchankRCAbelsonRP (1977) Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding. New York: Psychology Press.
54.
ScheeleBGroebenN (1988) Dialog-Konsens-Methoden zur Rekonstruktion Subjektiver Theorien: die Heidelberger Struktur-Lege-Technik (SLT), konsensuale Ziel-Mittel-Argumentation und kommunikative Flussdiagramm-Beschreibung von Handlungen. Tübingen: Francke.
55.
SchöneMHerrnkindM (2021) Die Fragilität polizeilicher Autorität. Polizei/Wissen01(2021): 7–12.
56.
SchophausM (2016) Reflexionskompetenz und Bürokratie. Die Neue Hochschule03(2016): 74–77.
57.
SchophausM (2017) Der Einfluss individueller Reflexionskompetenz auf die Polizeikultur. In: FreitagMSchophausM (eds) Reflexive Polizei. Vermittlung von Reflexionskompetenz im Hochschulstudium. Frankfurt: Verlag für Polizeiwissenschaft, 139–152.
58.
SchophausMWeberM (2019) Reflexionskompetenz in der Polizei. Polizei und Wissenschaft(1/2019): 57–63.
59.
SennetR (1985) Autorität. Frankfurt: Fischer.
60.
SidaniusJCotterillSSheehy-SkeffingtonJ, et al. (2016) Social dominance theory: explorations in the psychology of oppression. In: SibleyCGBarlowFK (eds) The Cambridge Handbook of the Psychology of Prejudice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 149–187.
61.
SidaniusJLiuJHShaw & PrattoF (1994) Social dominance orientation, hierarchy attenuators and hierarchy enhancers: social dominance theory and the criminal justice system. Journal of Applied Social Psychology24(4): 338–366.
62.
SkolnickJ (1966) Justice Without Trial. New York: Wiley.
StallerMSKoernerSHeilV, et al. (2021) German Police recruits’ perception of skill transfer from training to the field. International Journal of Police Science & Management(24/02): 124–136.
65.
StallerMSKoernerSHeilV, et al. (2022) Police recruits’ wants and needs in police training in Germany. Security Journal36: 249–271.
66.
StarkeJHeckerM (2021) Autorität und Vertrauen in die Polizei. Eine auf Vertrauen gründende Autorität erhöht die Anzeigebereitschaft. Polizei/Wissen01(2021): 23–27.
67.
StraussACorbinJ (1998) Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
68.
SunshineJTylerT (2003) The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in shaping public support for policing. Law and Society Review37(3): 513–547.
TrinknerRJacksonJTylerTR (2018) Bounded authority. Expanding “appropriate” police behavior beyond procedural justice. Law and Human Behavior42(3): 280–293.
71.
TrinknerRTylerTRGoffPA (2016) Justice from within: the relations between a procedurally just organizational climate and police organizational efficiency, endorsement of democratic policing, and officer well-being. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law22(2): 158–172.
72.
TylerTR (1990) Why people obey the law. New Haven: Yale University Press.
73.
TylerTR (1997) The psychology of legitimacy: a relational perspective on voluntary deference to authorities. Personality and Social Psychology Review1(4): 323–345.
74.
Van MaanenJ (1973) Observations on the making of policemen. Human Organization32(4): 407–418.
75.
VerhaegheP (2016) Autorität und Verantwortung. München: Kunstmann.
76.
Vom Hau (2017) Autorität reloaded. Eine Neukonzeption gegen Gewalteskalation im Polizeidienst.. Wiesbaden: Springer.
77.
WeberM (1972) ) Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
78.
WeberM (2020a) Neue Autorität in der Polizei – die Entwicklung eines Modells zur neuen Autorität in der Polizei. Polizei und Wissenschaft02(2020): 50–61.
79.
WeberM (2020b) Die Bedeutung von Autorität und Respekt für polizeiliches Handeln. Wie entstehen polizeiliche Autorität und Respekt und wie können sie in polizeiliches Handeln integriert werden?SIAK Journal(4/2020): 13–23.
80.
WeberM (2021) Zum Umgang mit Macht, Gewalt, Autorität und Respekt innerhalb der Polizei: ein Workshopentwurf. Polizei/Wissen01(2021): 30–35.
81.
WolfeSEMcleanKAlpertGP, et al. (2024) Us versus them? The problem of cognitive distortions in policing. Police Quarterly27(4), 532–560.
82.
WolfeSEMcLeanKRojekJ, et al. (2022) Advancing a theory of police officer training motivation and receptivity. Justice Quarterly39(1): 201–223.
83.
WolfeSERojekJManjarrez JrVM, et al. (2018) Why does organizational justice matter? Uncertainty management among law enforcement officers. Journal of Criminal Justice54: 20–29.
84.
ZakiraiNOsmanINoraneeN (2023) The influence of personality traits on ethical behavior of police: the mediating effect of ethical leadership. Information Management and Business Review15(4): 138–145.
