When Outcomes Prompt Criticism of Procedures: An Analysis of the Rodney King Case

Abstract

A content analysis of newspaper editorials about the trial of the four officers accused of beating Rodney King investigated when people would become concerned with procedural propriety in the case. Consistent with research demonstrating that people's moral convictions are important determinants of their perceptions of fairness and reactions to outcomes, results revealed that people were more critical of the procedures used in the case after learning the “unjust” verdict than before. Specifically, editorials only mentioned aspects of procedures after the verdict was announced, despite potential reasons for preverdict procedural concern. Editorials also contained more mentions of racism post‐ than preverdict suggesting that the “unjust” verdict also prompted concerns with institutionalized procedural problems.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 44 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.