The just world hypothesis as an argumentative resource in debates about unemployment benefits

The concept of the “just world” is established as a key explanation for how people make sense of inequality so that those deemed to score high in belief in a just world are more likely to hold prejudicial beliefs and to blame people in poverty for their situations. However, this is an inadequate explanation for such complicated and controversial issues. To better understand talk about the just world and the controversial issue of the distribution of unemployment benefits (an issue of inequality), a discursive psychological approach to the just world is used. Therefore, a discourse analysis focusses on 2 feature length British televised discussions about benefit claimants called “The Big Benefit Row: Live” (Channel 5 3/2/2014) and “Benefits Britain: the Debate” (Channel 4 17/2/2014). The analysis demonstrates that people draw on both just and unjust world arguments simultaneously and also topicalise what counts as just so as to support their positions on unemployment benefits, rather than in the consistent way that just world theory would predict. It is therefore argued that the just world should be recast as a cultural value that facilitates arguments about benefits, rather than an internally held belief.     

Just world beliefs in an unjust society: A cross cultural comparison

Groups of matched British students(N = 53) and school-children (N = 70) and South African students(N = 86) and school-children(N = 69) completed the Rubin-Peplau Just World scale which yields three scores: beliefs in a just world (JW), beliefs in an unjust world (UJW), difference between just and unjust scores. A three-way (2 sex, 2 nationality, 2 education status) ANOVA was computed which showed that although there were no sex, and only one educational status difference, nationality yielded a highly significant difference on both just world, and total scores. The results were interpreted in terms of previous studies of just world beliefs and authoritarianism in South Africa. It was argued that beliefs in a just world help people justify the status quo in unjust societies.     

Belief in a just world and trust

Three studies examined the relationship between belief in a just world and level of trust. Results showed that subjects with a high level of belief in a just world were (a) less suspicious with regard to deception in a social-psychological experiment, (b) less suspicious with regard to the promise of a free gift, and (c) less suspicious with regard to the government's position on several public issues. The same studies also examined the relationships among belief in internal-external control, authoritarianism, and level of trust. In some but not all cases, belief in internal control and high level of authoritarianism were related to more trusting attitudes. It was suggested that the relationship between internality (as measured by the I-E Scale) and trust was mediated by the construct of belief in a just world.     

Believing in a personal just world helps maintain well-being at work by coloring organizational justice perceptions

Justice is a core fundamental theme for individuals in organizations. This study suggests that believing the world is just where one gets what one deserves, and deserves what one gets, is an important personal resource that helps maintain well-being at work. Further, it suggests that personal belief in a just world, but not general belief in a just world, exerts its influence on well-being through increasing overall justice perceptions of the work environment. Using two waves of data drawn from a large random sample of working adults in Switzerland, results showed that personal belief in a just world at time 1 indeed augmented perceptions of overall organizational justice, and this in turn increased job satisfaction at time 2, that is, 1 year later. As expected, this effect was only evident for personal and not general belief in a just world, highlighting personal belief in a just world as an important yet largely overlooked resource for the work context, and suggesting the need to consider individual’s beliefs about justice as drivers of overall organizational justice perceptions.     

Cognition and Citizen Participation in Social Action1

Citizen participation in social action may depend, in part, on certain beliefs about the world and one's power to initiate change. Existing tests of internality and belief in a just world were modified, creating independent measures of belief in personal power and belief in possible injustices in society. The paper reports data on the reliability and the convergent and discriminant validity of the new Personal Power and Injustice scales. In Studies 1 and 2 the scales predicted outcomes in theoretically relevant experiments. In Study 3 they discriminated among community groups who did, or did not, engage in social action.     

The impact of death qualification, belief in a just world, legal authoritarianism, and locus of control on venirepersons' evaluations of aggravating and mitigating circumstances in capital trials

The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of death qualification, belief in a just world (BJW), legal authoritarianism (RLAQ), and locus of control (LOC) on venirepersons' evaluations of aggravating and mitigating circumstances in capital trials. 212 venirepersons from the 12th Judicial Circuit in Bradenton, FL, completed a booklet that contained the following: one question that measured their attitudes toward the death penalty; one question that categorized their death-qualification status; the BJW, LOC, and RLAQ scales; a summary of the guilt and penalty phases of a capital case; a 26-item measure that required participants to evaluate aggravators, nonstatutory mitigators, and statutory mitigators on a 6-point Likert scale; sentence preference; and standard demographic questions. Results indicated that death-qualified venirepersons were more likely to demonstrate higher endorsements of aggravating factors and lower endorsements of both nonstatutory and statutory mitigating factors. Death-qualified participants were also more likely to have a high belief in a just world, espouse legal authoritarian beliefs, and exhibit an internal locus of control. Findings also suggested that venirepersons with a low belief in a just world and an external locus of control demonstrated higher endorsements of statutory mitigators. Participants with legal authoritarian beliefs revealed higher endorsements of aggravators and lower endorsements of nonstatutory mitigators. Legal implications and applications are discussed.     

Catching the liar as a matter of justice: Effects of belief in a just world on deception detection accuracy and the moderating role of mortality salience

Belief in a just world has been linked to high interpersonal trust and less suspicion of deception. We therefore predicted people with a strong dispositional belief in a just world to have low motivation to accurately detect deception. Accordingly, we hypothesized such a belief to be negatively related to accuracy in deception detection. Furthermore, research on Terror Management Theory has indicated that culturally shared values, such as justice, become more important after mortality salience. Thus, we assumed engaging in justice concerns after a death threat is especially relevant for people with a strong belief in a just world, and further, that accurate deception detection is a matter of justice. Based on this reasoning, we expected people with a strong belief in a just world to have an increased motivation to accurately detect deception after mortality salience. Consequently, we hypothesized dispositional differences in belief in a just world to be unrelated to accuracy in deception detection after mortality salience. In line with these predictions, our study revealed that participants with a strong (vs. weak) belief in a just world were worse in deception detection unless they had first been reminded of their mortality.     

Victim blaming and exoneration of the perpetrator in domestic violence: the role of beliefs in a just world and ambivalent sexism

The existence of domestic violence is closely linked to several ideological factors that include sexism and other beliefs about society in general, namely the belief in a just world. In this study, which involved 485 people of both sexes aged between 18 and 70 years, we analyzed the influence of these ideological variables of the perceivers and characteristics of the situation on judgments of a gender aggression--blaming the victim and exonerating the perpetrator. Results showed differences in the reactions of observers depending on the cause that triggered the aggression. Participants blamed the victim and exonerated the aggressor more when no cause of the aggression was mentioned than when a cause was mentioned (the woman wanted to separate, to see an old male friend, or simply to take a trip with her female friends). We also found clear effects of hostile sexism and just world beliefs on the dependent variables. Results showed that the influence of just world beliefs depended on the fact of mention or not a cause for the aggression.     

Two spheres of belief in justice: extensive support for the bidimensional model of belief in a just world

The purpose of this research comprising five studies (N = 666) was to further corroborate the bidimensional conceptualisation of the belief in a just world proposed by Lipkus et al. (1996). It was demonstrated that belief in a just world for the Self (and not for Others) was correlated to evaluations of the meaning of life. Belief in a just world for Others was significantly correlated to discrimination against the elderly, stigmatisation of poverty, and higher penal punitiveness, while belief in a just world for Self was weakly or not related to these variables. Together, these observations confirm the importance of the conceptual and psychometric distinction between these two spheres of the belief in a just world.     

无辜受害事件对公正世界信念的威胁:观察者的角色偏倚

无辜受害者信息往往打破民众“好人有好报”的公正世界,而这种公正世界信念的威胁也因人而异。通过情绪Stroop效应验证这一心理现象,并探讨观察者与无辜受害者的群体归属以及观察者的不公正体验是否会影响公正世界信念威胁的程度。结果表明:(1)无论观察者是否与无辜受害者属于同一群体,或者观察者有无不公正体验,无辜受害者信息均会激活观察者的公正世界信念。(2)相比于外群体,当观察者与受害者属于同一群体类型(内群体)时,其公正世界信念的激活程度更强。(3)内群体观察者在有和无不公正体验的条件下,公正世界信念的威胁程度不存在显著差异。     

Further validation of a measure of irrational belief

Malouff and Schutte (1986) developed a measure of irrational belief intended to be shorter and more content valid than other such measures and reported preliminary evidence of reliability and validity for the measure. The present two studies examined further the validity of the new measure. Study 1 produced evidence of construct validity in that a significant correlation was found between scores on the Malouff & Schutte measure and scores on a measure of hostility, which is a theoretically related construct. Study 2 produced evidence of construct validity in that scores on the Malouff & Schutte measure were found to be correlated with scores on two measures of theoretically related constructs: anxiety and irrational tendencies/beliefs. Study 2 also produced evidence of discriminant validity in that scores on the Malouff & Schutte measure were found to be significantly more highly correlated with scores on the more theoretically similar irrational tendencies/beliefs scale than with scores on the anxiety measure.     

Belief in a just world and subjective well-being: mothers of normal and Down syndrome children

A cross-sectional study examined the relationship between three dimensions of the belief in a just world and the subjective well-being of Pakistani mothers of normal and Down syndrome children (n = 100 each). Personal belief in a just world and two dimensions of general belief in a just world-beliefs in immanent and ultimate justice-were assessed along with four dimensions of subjective well-being: life satisfaction, mood, state anxiety, and depression. It was hypothesized that personal belief in a just world and belief in ultimate justice would be positively associated with subjective well-being for both groups of mothers. Results were obtained through moderated regression analyses. In line with our hypothesis, personal belief in a just world positively predicted life satisfaction and mood level and negatively predicted state anxiety and depression in both groups of mothers. In contrast, beliefs in immanent and ultimate justice were not consistently adaptive. In particular, the more the mothers of a Down syndrome child believed in immanent justice, the more anxiety they experienced the previous week. In addition, the more the mothers of normal children believed in ultimate justice, the more they experienced anxiety. The pattern of results persisted when controlled for mothers' education, the total number of their children and marital status. Overall, the results support the role of personal belief in a just world as a personal resource in adverse as well as normal life circumstances.     

Justice organisationnelle et croyance en un monde juste : perceptions et réactions des dirigeants d’entreprise vis-à-vis de leurs managers (in)justes

Introduction and objectivesFew studies analyzed the reactions of a company head according to the degree of organizational justice adopted by his managers towards their subordinates. Similarly, the links between organizational justice and belief in a just world have rarely been studied. The aim of this research is to examine whether the three dimensions of organizational justice implemented by a manager have role of supervisor who had to value a manager who adopted, on each of the three dimensions of organizational justice, a just vs. unjust conduct. Participants were also asked about their belief in a just world an impact on the perceptions and reactions of the supervisor of the manager, and if the degree of belief in a just world mediates these perceptions and reactions.MethodIn terms of method, 410 men and women with a professional activity held the role of supervisor who had to value a manager who adopted, on each of the three dimensions of organizational justice, a just vs. unjust conduct. Participants were also asked about their belief in a just world, with a differentiation between personal belief in a just world versus belief in a just world to others.ResultsThe results show main effects and interaction effects between the three forms of justice on the manager's perception score, intends to award him a bonus, and the amount of assigned bonus. The results also indicate an influence of the degree of personal just world belief on the evaluation of the manager, but without interaction between just world belief and the dimensions of organizational justice.ConclusionsThe conclusion summarizes the main findings, examines their limits and deals with their theoretical and practical implications.     

SACRAL: toward the meaning and measurement of friendliness

Friendliness was regarded as a construct or dispositional tendency consisting of four components: Self-concept (S), the person's beliefs about self related to peer relationships; Accessibility (AC), giving behaviors involving attention and respect; Rewardingness (R), the giving of more tangible rewards, such as money and compliments; and Alienation (AL), personal beliefs about acceptance and the world as a friendly place. A 40-item questionnaire was developed to assess these components of friendliness. Studies of the questionnaire with college students and children supported its internal consistency, test-retest reliability, concurrent validity, construct validity, and discriminant validity. Although virtually all respondents reported themselves as friendly, high SACRAL scorers, when compared with low scorers, less frequently experience loneliness and in a variety of contexts claim to be more apt to engage in friendly behaviors. The impression that emerges of relatively low scorers on SACRAL is of people whose professed actions are somewhat inconsistent with their personal beliefs.     

Just world beliefs,perceived stress,and health behavior: The impact of a procedurally just world∗

Recent research suggests that a just world view may promote good health while low belief in a just world may deleteriously affect well-being. However, this research is limited in that specific components of justice beliefs that are important to health are not well articulated. Additionally, many potential pathways linking perceived fairness to physical health remain largely unexplored. In the present study, we examined how individual differences in both distributive (outcomes and allocations) and procedural (rules and processes) just world beliefs are associated with stress and health behavior. Participants were recruited from two universities (N = 426) to complete individual differences measures of procedural and distributive just world beliefs, and also measures of perceived stress, health behavior, and physical symptoms. Results suggested that procedural, but not distributive just world views were important to well-being. In particular, belief in a procedurally just world was associated directly with lower perceived stress, and also indirectly with adaptive health behaviors and fewer physical health complaints. In general, these results suggest that beliefs about a procedurally just world may be particularly important to well-being, while also suggesting specific directions and mechanisms for future attempts at developing justice-oriented health interventions.     

Belief in a Just World and Attitudes Toward Immigrants and Foreign Workers: A Cultural Comparison Between Hawaii and Germany

University students in Hawaii ( N = 171) and in Germany ( N = 61) completed the 6-item Belief in a Just World Scale (BJWS; Dalbert, Montada, & Schmitt, 1987), an instrument developed in Germany to measure general just world belief. Results indicated that the BJWS is equally well suited to measure just world belief in an American sample. Subjects also completed a short instrument to assess justice judgments about the situation of a disadvantaged group (in Hawaii: Pacific Island immigrants; in Germany: foreign workers). For both samples, the disadvantaged group's situation was judged as more just by subjects with a greater belief in a just world and by those who were more socially similar to the disadvantaged group. Compared to students in Germany, those from Hawaii held stronger beliefs in a just world. Results were discussed in terms of generality and cultural specifity of the just world belief.     

Different Types of Religiosity and Lay Intuitions About Free Will/Determinism in Turkey

Religiosity has been found to be positively associated with belief in free will (FW) in the Western world. In the Muslim world, however, religiosity exhibits several characteristics that set it apart from the Western world, including an overemphasis on fate or divine predestination. We, therefore, investigated FW/determinism beliefs and different types of religiosity and conservatism in two samples in Turkey, a predominantly Muslim country (N = 1,690). In Study 1, a confirmatory factor analysis showed that FAD-Plus provided good fit to the data. Study 2 revealed that FW belief is not related to any of the religiosity measures (intrinsic, extrinsic, quest), whereas fatalistic determinism is consistently related to religiosity. The unique predictor of free will turned out to be belief in a just world. Overall, these findings indicate that FW belief is not inherently related to religiosity in Turkey, whereas fatalistic determinism is central to Turkish people’s belief systems.     

Justifying Outcomes Versus Processes: Distributive and Procedural Justice Beliefs as Predictors of Positive and Negative Affectivity

System justifying beliefs can have adaptive consequences for individuals that include enhanced coping and decreased emotional distress. The present study examined whether individual differences in two kinds of system justifying beliefs uniquely predict dispositional affect. Participants from across the United States were recruited via internet to complete dispositional measures of procedural and distributive justice beliefs, and also brief measures of positive and negative affectivity. While belief in fair outcomes (distributive just world beliefs) was generally associated with greater positive affectivity, belief in fair processes (procedural just world beliefs) was modestly associated with decreased negative affectivity. In addition, positive and negative affectivity were predicted by interactions between procedural and distributive just world beliefs, with each accentuating the general emotional benefit provided by the other. Finally, an interactive effect of procedural just world beliefs and social class was obtained for positive affectivity, with greater positive affectivity occurring for disadvantaged (lower income) individuals who had strong procedural just world beliefs. In general, these results suggest the potential for unique and interactive relationships between particular system justifying beliefs and measures of emotion, especially among members of advantaged versus disadvantaged groups.     

公正世界信念与跨情境动机效应

采用2（公正世界信念状态：公正vs不公正）×2（中奖者的个性品质：正向vs负向）被试间实验设计,以在校大学生为被试,考察公正世界信念是否具有跨情境动机效应。结果发现：预先激活的公正世界信念状态迁移到了回忆不同个性品质中奖者奖金数额这个不同情境中,影响了人们的记忆。表明公正世界信念存在跨情境动机效应。     

Schadenfreude and just world belief

The present study tested the hypothesis that a threat of a just world belief intensifies experience of schadenfreude (i.e., pleasure at another's misfortune). The participants read scenarios which were designed to threaten or maintain their just world belief. Subsequently, they were transferred to an online magazine presenting funny stories about other peoples' failures. As presumed, the participants exposed to the threat of just world belief spent more time on reading. These results confirmed the existence of a link between just world threat and schadenfreude.