Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42827434›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental criminology2026

'I can see that it's bad for them': third party judgements about the effect of procedural injustice on mental health and relationships with the police.

Arabella Kyprianides, Ben Bradford

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental criminology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Arabella KyprianidesDepartment of Security and Crime Science, University College London, Shropshire House, 1 Capper Street, London, WC1E 6JA UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7168-089X
Ben BradfordDepartment of Security and Crime Science, University College London, Shropshire House, 1 Capper Street, London, WC1E 6JA UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Explore why people react so strongly to procedural Methods: An online experiment tested whether exposure to procedurally unjust police behaviour directed at crime victims would influence participants' assessments of the subject's marginalisation, mental health outcomes, and their overall perceptions of the police ( Results: Exposure to procedurally unjust police behaviour led to more negative evaluations of its psychological impact on the victim. Procedural injustice was seen as harmful to mental health due to its link to social exclusion. Such exposure reduced trust, legitimacy, and identification with police. These negative perceptions were driven by recognition of the victim's psychological harm. Conclusion: Findings highlight the critical role of psychological harm in driving public responses to unjust policing. Addressing this harm is essential for fostering trust and repairing fractured relationships between police and the communities they serve.

Indexed as

ExclusionIdentificationLegitimacyMental healthProcedural injusticeTrust

Identifiers

PMID42827434
PMCPMC13627229

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.