The structure of the legitimacy of health care institutions. The Polish adaptation of the Legitimacy Questionnaire and its psychometric properties
Tomasz Prusiński
The Maria Grzegorzewska University, Institute of Psychology, Psychological Testing Unithttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-8782-1498
Abstract
Aim: The aim of the empirical research was (a) to identify the structure of institutional legitimacy in the health service and (b) to develop a Polish version of the Legitimacy Questionnaire (LQ) and determine its psychometric properties, especially validity and reliability.
Method: To achieve the aim, based on data from two independent measurements, the author performed factor analyses: exploratory (nEFA = 210, 134 women and 76 men, MAGE = 42.37) and confirmatory (nCFA = 298, 184 women and 114 men, MAGE = 37.02). Factor analyses were used to assess validity. Multidimensional reliability estimation was also performed, using several coefficients: classic (Cronbach’s α, Jöreskog’s CR) and non-classic ones (Aranowska’s γ, ϱ2 intraclass correlation coefficient).
Results: The adopted data analysis strategy yielded a three-factor structure of institutional legitimacy. The results of analyses provided strong evidence of acceptable goodness of measurement using the Polish version of the LQ. Reliability, just like construct validity, were confirmed, their levels were acceptable.
Conclusions: The results indicate that the adapted LQ is a psychometrically valuable measure operationalizing three dimensions of legitimacy: normative alignment, duty to obey, and institutional trust.
Keywords:
legitimacy, health service, normative alignment, duty to obey, institutional trust, the Legitimacy QuestionnaireReferences
Aranowska, E. (2005). Pomiar ilościowy w psychologii [Quantitative measurement in psychology]. Scholar. Google Scholar
Blanco-González, A., Prado-Román, C., & Díez-Martín, F. (2017). Building a European legitimacy index. American Behavioral Scientist, 61(5), 509–525. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764217693282
Crossref
Google Scholar
Burdziej, S. (2018). Sprawiedliwość i prawomocność [Justice and legitimacy]. Wydawnictwo Naukowe UMK. Google Scholar
Burdziej, S., Guzik, K., & Pilitowski, B. (2019). Fairness at trial: The impact of procedural justice and other experiential factors on criminal defendants’ perceptions of court legitimacy in Poland. Law & Social Inquiry, 44(2), 359–390. https://doi.org/10.1111/lsi.12358
Crossref
Google Scholar
Calton, J., & Cattaneo, L. B. (2014). The effects of procedural and distributive justice on intimate partner violence victims’ mental health and likelihood of future help-seeking. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 84(4), 329–340. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0099841
Crossref
Google Scholar
Cao, L., & Graham, A. (2019). The measurement of legitimacy: A rush to judgment? Asian Journal of Criminology, 14(4), 291–299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11417-019-09297-w
Crossref
Google Scholar
Carroll, J. E., Smith H., & Hillier, S. (2008). When will older patients follow doctors’ recommendations? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38(5), 1127–1146. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00342.x
Crossref
Google Scholar
Cialdini, R. B., & Trost, M. R. (1998). Social influence: Social norms, conformity, and compliance. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 151–192). McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar
Cirasola, A., Midgley, N., Fonagy, P., Impact Consortium, & Martin, P. (2020). The factor structure of the Working Alliance Inventory short form in youth psychotherapy: An empirical investigation. Psychotherapy Research, 31(4), 535–547. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2020.1765041.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Dietz, W. H., Benkin, D. E., & Hunter, A. S. (2009) Public health law and the prevention and control of obesity. Milbank Quarterly, 87(1), 215–227. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14680009.2009.00553.x
Crossref
Google Scholar
Díez-Martín, F., Blanco-González, A., & Díez-de-Castro, E. (2021). Measuring a scientifically multifaceted concept: The jungle of organizational legitimacy. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 27(1), Article 100131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2020.10.001
Crossref
Google Scholar
Díez-Martín, F., Blanco-González, A., & Prado-Román, C. (2021). The intellectual structure of organizational legitimacy research: A co-citation analysis in business journals. Review of Managerial Science, 15(4), 1007–1043. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-020-00380-6
Crossref
Google Scholar
Jackson, J., & Gau, J. M. (2015). Carving up concepts? Differentiating between trust and legitimacy in public attitudes towards legal authority. In E. Shockley, T. M. S. Neal, L. Pytlik-Zillig, & B. Bornstein (Eds.), Interdisciplinary perspectives on trust: Towards theoretical and methodological integration (pp. 49‒69). Springer.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Jackson, J., Tyler, T. R., Bradford, B., Taylor, D., & Shiner, D. (2010). Legitimacy and procedural justice in prisons. Prison Service Journal, 191, 4–10. Google Scholar
Jackson, J., & Pósch, K. (2019). New directions of research in fairness and legal authority: A focus on causal mechanisms. In J. Jackson & K. Pósch (Eds.), Social psychology and justice (pp. 181–212). Routledge.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Jonkisz, A. (1998). Ciągłość teoretycznych wytworów nauki. Ujęcie strukturalne [The continuity of theoretical products of science: A structural perspective]. Wydawnictwo UMSC. Google Scholar
Levi, M., Sacks, A., & Tyler, T. R. (2009). Conceptualizing legitimacy, measuring legitimating beliefs. American Behavioral Scientist, 53(3), 354–375. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764209338797
Crossref
Google Scholar
Mentovich, A., Rhee, E., & Tyler, T. R. (2014). My life for a voice: The influence of voice on health-care decisions. Social Justice Research, 27(1), 99–117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-014-0201-y
Crossref
Google Scholar
Miller, D. T. (1999). The norm of self-interest. American Psychologist, 54(12), 1053–1060.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Murphy, K., Tyler, T. R., & Curtis, A. (2009). Nurturing regulatory compliance: Is procedural justice effective when people question the legitimacy of the law? Regulation & Governance, 3, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2009.01043.x
Crossref
Google Scholar
Parker, C., & Nielsen, V. L. (2011). Explaining compliance: Business responses to regulation. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Pérez-Arechaederra, D. (2019). The psychology of perceived justice in shared health care decision making. In J. Jackson & K. Pósch (Eds.), Social psychology and justice (pp. 284–294). Routledge.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Prado-Roman, C., Diez-Martin, F., & Blanco-Gonzalez, A. (2020). The effect of communication on the legitimacy and performance of organizations. Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Negócios, 22(3), 565–581. https://doi.org/10.7819/rbgn.v22i3.4071
Crossref
Google Scholar
Prusiński, T. (2020). What motivates people to comply with the law and regard it as legitimate in the Polish system of justice? The identification and analysis of the construct of procedural justice. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 51(2) 126–138. https://doi.org/10.24425/ppb.2020.133770
Crossref
Google Scholar
Puhl, R. M., & Heue, C. A. (2011). Public opinion about laws to prohibit weight discrimination in the United States. Obesity, 19, 74–82. https://doi.org/10.1038/oby.2010.126
Crossref
Google Scholar
Rasinski, K., Tyler, T. R., & Fridkin, K. (1985). Legitimacy and leadership endorsement: Mediating effects of personal and institutional legitimacy on leadership endorsement and system support. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(2), 386–394.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Schulhofer, S. J., Tyler, T. R., & Huo, A. Z. (2011). American policing at a crossroads: Unsustainable policies and the procedural justice alternative. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 101(2), 335–374. Google Scholar
Smith, J. (2001). Patients’ failure to adhere to prescriptions accounts for 10% of hospital admissions. Health Care Strategic Management, 19(6), 10. Google Scholar
Suddaby, R., Bitektine, A., & Haack, P. (2017). Legitimacy. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 451–478. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2015.0101
Crossref
Google Scholar
Sunshine, J., & Tyler, T. R. (2003). The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in shaping public support for policing. Law & Society Review, 37(3), 513–548. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5893.3703002
Crossref
Google Scholar
Szymańska, A. (2016). Założenia formalne modeli weryfikowanych przy pomocy układów równań strukturalnych [Formal assumptions of the structural equation models]. Studia Psychologica, 1(16), 5–25.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Thüm, S., Janssen, C., Pfaff, H., Lefering, R., Neugebauer, E. A., & Ommen, O. (2012). The association between psychosocial care by physicians and patients’ trust: A retrospective analysis of severely injured patients in surgical intensive care units. GMS Psycho-Social-Medicine, 9, Doc04. https://doi.org/10.3205/psm000082. Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R. (2006). Psychological perspectives on legitimacy and legitimation. Annual Review of Psychology, 57(1), 375–400. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190038
Crossref
Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R. (2007). Procedural justice and the courts. Court Review, 44(1/2), 26–31. Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R. (2009). Legitimacy and criminal justice: The benefits of self-regulation. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 7, 307–359. Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R. (2021). Why people obey the law. Princeton University Press.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Tyler, T., & Jackson, J. (2013). Future challenges in the study of legitimacy and criminal justice. Yale Law School, Public Law Working Paper, 264, 1–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2141322
Crossref
Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R., & Jackson, J. (2014). Popular legitimacy and the exercise of legal authority: Motivating compliance, cooperation and engagement. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 20(1), 78–95. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034514
Crossref
Google Scholar
Tyler, T., Mentovich, A., & Satyavada, S. (2013). What motivates adherence to medical recommendations? The procedural justice approach to gaining deference in the medical arena. Regulation & Governance, 8(3), 350–370. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12043
Crossref
Google Scholar
The Maria Grzegorzewska University, Institute of Psychology, Psychological Testing Unit
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8782-1498
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
