Although the impact of procedural justice on citizens’ satisfaction with the police and other branches of the criminal justice system has been tested in several geopolitical contexts, this is the first study to examine the relative impacts of police procedural justice, lawyer procedural justice, and judge procedural justice on satisfaction with a country’s criminal justice system. To assess the universal applicability of procedural justice, scholars must carry out research in all geopolitical regions. However, sub-Saharan Africa appears to be a region that scholars have neglected for far too long. As a result, the current study assesses the relative impacts of three strands of procedural justice—police, lawyer, and judge—on satisfaction with the criminal justice system in Kenya. Using a sample of 523 students from a prominent Kenyan university, we found that all three strands of procedural justice predicted satisfaction with Kenya’s criminal justice system under the country’s new Constitution, although judge procedural justice exerted the strongest influence on satisfaction. Also, less highly educated students (first-year students, compared to sophomores, juniors, and seniors) and male students were more satisfied with Kenya’s criminal justice system. The study’s implications for policy and future research are discussed.

Although the influence of procedural justice on citizens’ satisfaction and cooperation with police has been tested in several geopolitical contexts, this is the first study to examine the relationship between procedural justice and satisfaction with Kenya’s police and Kenya’s criminal justice system on a Kenyan college campus. Using a sample of 523 students from a prominent Kenyan university, we found that procedural justice and officer integrity predicted satisfaction with both Kenya’s police and criminal justice system. Also, more highly educated students (sophomores, juniors, and seniors, compared to freshmen) were more satisfied with both the Kenyan police and criminal justice system. Conversely, victims of crime in the community were less satisfied with Kenyan police, and students who had a negative personal experience with police were less satisfied with the country’s criminal justice system. Although instrumental factors of policing (e.g., police effectiveness) were not tested in this study, thus precluding a comparative assessment of normative and instrumental models of policing, this study contributes to the extant literature by pointing out the salience of procedural justice and officer integrity for improving the relationship between the police and the communities they are sworn to serve. The study’s implications for policy are discussed.

Crime victimization and fear of crime have been studied extensively in the extant literature, but very few studies have been carried out in sub-Saharan Africa. Using a sample of 523 students from a leading university in Nairobi, Kenya, we found that females, older students, and prior crime victims are more fearful of crime at school, of crime in the community, and of overall crime. In addition, we found that incivility, measured as the perceived prevalence of drug use among Kenyans, was also statistically significantly related to fear of crime at school, fear of crime in the community, and the overall measure of fear of crime. These findings are consistent with findings from the extant literature, mainly from the United States. Thus, we argue that the correlates of fear of crime appear to be similar in different geopolitical contexts. The implications of the findings for campus safety and security are discussed.

Research on the distribution of resources typically focuses on anticipated outcomes. This paper investigates the social norms people use to distribute adventitious (unanticipated) outcomes. Participants in this study read a scenario where either they, or the person they were with (an acquaintance or a friend), received either an unexpected gain or loss which was or was not easily divisible. Participants were then asked to continue the story by describing what they believed would happen after the adventitious event. We measured if and how the outcome was divided between the two individuals involved as well as subjects’ and an outside observer's perceptions of the fairness of these divisions and any expectations they had about the effect of the event on the quality of the relationship between the two. Results suggest that people endorse a “losers weepers” norm more often than they do a “finders keepers” or “share and share alike” (equality) norm, although all were endorsed. Egocentric distributions and expectations permeated the story continuations. Although participants frequently suggest that they would share gains, they also expected that their sacrifices (sharing their own gain or in another's loss) would help improve the future relationship between the two more than would similar sacrifices by the other (i.e., they were often egocentric martyrs). Friendship and the divisibility of the outcome also affected allocation rules and expectations for the future relationship. The discussion highlights the irony associated with the finding that when an adventitious gain is not shared with another, the future relationship between the two is expected to be less positive. Thus, adventitious outcomes (and gains in particular) can be a double-edged sword.