The generalisability of procedural justice inpost-Confucian societies—A test of normative versus instrumental models in Taiwan

This study investigates Procedural Justice Theory's (PJT) generalisability in Taiwan, a post-Confucian society where its applicability is underexplored compared to Western contexts. PJT posits fair procedures enhance legitimacy and compliance; however, its relevance in collectivist East Asian societies is unclear. This research tests PJT's normative model against instrumental models (deterrence, effectiveness) in explaining legal compliance in Taipei. Data from 1,604 Taipei residents via computer-aided telephone interviews were analysed using Structural Equation Modelling. The study examined relationships between perceived procedural justice, police effectiveness, distributive justice, police legitimacy (duty to obey, normative alignment), perceived sanction risk, and self-reported traffic compliance. Findings offered partial support for both models. Police effectiveness influenced perceived sanction risk and compliance intentions; however, a counterintuitive negative link emerged between perceived risk and compliance. Procedural justice correlated with the duty to obey, but this duty negatively predicted compliance intentions; conversely, normative alignment positively predicted compliance. Notably, distributive justice significantly predicted legitimacy components and traffic compliance. This study highlights the nuanced interplay of cultural values and individual perceptions in Taiwanese public responses to policing. Results challenge direct PJT applications, emphasising distributive justice's importance. Legitimacy in Taiwan appears rooted in a hybrid of values including effectiveness, distributive fairness, and procedural fairness alongside cultural norms. This calls for context-specific legitimacy frameworks and suggests policing strategies should prioritise fair treatment and equitable service delivery.