*Research for this paper has been supported by grants from the Law and Social Sciences Program of the National Science Foundation (SES-7908872, SES-8310393 and SES-8310451). The points of view expressed in this paper are the authors' alone and do not necessarily reflect the position of the National Science Foundation. We would like to thank Gloria Penney, Robert Briggs, Helen Kincaid and Scott Lauze for their invaluable contributions in collecting and coding the data reported in this paper.
In Search of Legitimacy: Toward An Empirical Analysis
Article first published online: 28 JUN 2008
Law & Policy
Volume 8, Issue 3, pages 257–273, July 1986
How to Cite
McEWEN, C. A. and MAIMAN, R. J. (1986), In Search of Legitimacy: Toward An Empirical Analysis. Law & Policy, 8: 257–273. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9930.1986.tb00380.x
- Issue published online: 28 JUN 2008
- Article first published online: 28 JUN 2008
Legitimacy is a much used concept in the social sciences. However, the absence of precise operational meaning has prompted questions about its utility as an explanation of compliance with social norms. Most recently, Alan Hyde has argued that legitimacy cannot be disentangled from other explanations of compliance such as coercion and self-interest and should, therefore, be abandoned. However, institutional, attitudinal, and behavioral dimensions of legitimacy can be operationalized. As part of our research on small claims courts we examined variations in institutional processes and legitimacy, gathered data on levels of voluntary compliance, and questioned defendants about their reasons for paying claims against them. We conclude that institutional legitimacy is related to voluntary compliance, and that the “language of obligation” is an important part of normal discourse. Operational meanings for legitimacy are available and empirical research about legitimacy should be a prominent part of the social science research agenda.