Who Questions the Legitimacy of Law? A Latent Profile Analysis Using National Data in China

Objective: The present study aims to identify meaningful distinct subgroups of legal legitimacy, thereby addressing the need to move beyond a general legitimacy-based model. Hypotheses: We hypothesized (1) we would find distinct profiles for legal legitimacy, (2) perceived procedural justice would predict the identified profiles, and (3) profiles with low normative alignment or duty to obey scores would be associated with disadvantaged groups. Method: This study utilized a subset of survey items from the Chinese General Social Survey 2015 to measure legal legitimacy. Eight survey items, selected based on theoretical considerations, underwent a confirmatory factor analysis to assess their suitability for loading onto the two dimensions of legal legitimacy. A latent profile analysis was then performed on the scores obtained from the eight items to identify distinct profiles of legal legitimacy. Multinomial logistic regression models were estimated to examine the associations between the identified profiles, procedural justice, and sociodemographic characteristics. The analyses were conducted on a large sample of Chinese citizens (N = 3,475, 47.8% males; M_age = 50.3 years, SD = 16.8). Results: We identified four distinct profiles of legal legitimacy, namely contented conformist, relatively satisfied conformist, ordinary conformist, and cynical conformist. In support of the construct validity of the profiles, we found that these profiles differed on key factors of procedural justice and multiple sociodemographic variables. Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate population heterogeneity in legal legitimacy and underscore the importance of a multidimensional conceptualization. © 2024 American Psychological Association.