When extraordinary injustice leads to ordinary response: How perpetrator power and size of an injustice event affect bystander efficacy and collective action

Although bystanders can play an integral role in the process of social change, relatively few studies have examined the factors that influence bystander collective action. The present research explores the effect of perpetrator power on bystander efficacy and collective action, as well as the moderating role of impact of the injustice event. Across two experiments, bystanders perceived that collective action would be less effective and were less willing to engage in collective action when a high‐power perpetrator engaged in injustice, compared with a low‐power perpetrator. These effects were moderated by impact of the injustice event, such that the effects of power were especially present under conditions of large impact (many victims), compared with small impact (fewer victims). Whereas the effect of the interaction of perpetrator power and impact on bystander efficacy was explained by perceptions of normativity of the injustice event, the effect of the interaction on bystander collective action was explained by bystander efficacy. Implications for bystander collective action and social change are discussed. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Long-acting reversible contraception: A route to reproductive justice or injustice

This article presents information on unintended pregnancies and the ongoing efforts of policy makers to promote long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) to reduce the numbers of such pregnancies. Also discussed is the tension between the encouragement of LARC to promote the public's interests in achieving that goal versus the need to assure that all women can decide about their bodies and reproductive needs. Our discussion includes information, primarily from the United States, on (a) risks associated with unintended pregnancies, (b) LARC devices approved in the United States (copper intrauterine devices (IUDs), hormone IUDs, and implants), (c) public and social benefits of increasing the use of LARC, (d) disadvantages and barriers to using LARC, (e) dangers of promoting LARC in unjust ways, and (f) the meaning of reproductive justice and its connection to social justice. By sharing the information with the audience of this journal, we hope that it will be integrated into clinical work and research on mental health and development. We also hope that experts in those fields will become discussants in the conversation regarding women's reproductive health and social justice that is taking place in the United States and elsewhere.     

Outcomes as affirmation of membership value: Material compensation as an administrative response to procedural injustice

The current line of research suggests that the provision of compensation by group representatives may be an effective way to address the identity concerns resulting from procedural violations because compensation serves to reaffirm the victim’s membership value, protecting his or her identity. A series of five studies is presented, demonstrating that compensation can function symbolically as a legitimate act of concern for the injustice victim. Results showed that offers of compensation by group representatives resulted in more favorable evaluations of the group and higher identification than when no compensation was offered, but only when the compensation was construed as a benevolent gesture and only when the injustice was identity relevant. Even unsuccessful attempts to compensate the victim resulted in positive reactions towards the group. Consistent with relational models of procedural justice, these effects were mediated by perceptions of membership value.     

The response to injustice: Effects of varying levels of social support and position of advantage or disadvantage

This study investigated the effects of varying levels of social support as well as position of advantage or disadvantage on subjects' response to injustice. Conditions of advantage and disadvantage were established by randomly assigning one member of each experimental dyad to a method of working which prevented him/her from earning points for prizes. Three levels of social support (“none,” “peer,” “authoritative”) were created. Advantaged and disadvantaged subjects receiving authoritative support for the possibility of change and disadvantaged subjects receiving peer support in the form of divided opinion statements rated the system as less fair than either group in the absence of support or the advantaged receiving only peer support. Disadvantaged subjects evidenced a tendency to assume personal responsibility for their lower outcomes. Social support reduced this tendency but did not eliminate it.     

Punitive versus compensatory reactions to injustice: Emotional antecedents to third-party interventions

The almost exclusive focus on punishment and inattention to compensatory alternatives in studies involving experimental games may yield patterns that do not accurately reflect how and when people respond to injustice, particularly if punishment and compensation are not psychologically equivalent approaches to justice restoration. In the current study, we examined participants' preference for punitive and compensatory actions, while also exploring emotional determinants and boundary conditions. Our results indicated that participants actually compensated victims more than they punished offenders and that the majority of participants assigned both. Furthermore, although both interventions were associated with emotional experiences of moral outrage toward the offender, self-focused emotions reflecting feelings of threat only predicted compensation and only when victims were aware that they had been victimized. These findings augment our understanding of third-party interventions, emphasizing the importance of considering response alternatives when studying the psychology of justice.     

真理：重温一场传统的论战

按照对"真"的结构分析,真理论可分为:内在论、符合论、融贯论和紧缩论。这四种方案各有其适用范围,但经过深入研究发现,除符合论以外的三种方案都存在棘手的难题。融贯论不能证成逻辑上的不矛盾律,不能合理地解决如何选择"支配性"信念系统的问题,并且它和内在论都不能解决偶然真问题。紧缩论的问题则是:若将"真"理解为提供一种认知担保,与其所主张的等值图式相结合,就可推出:信念p没有认知担保当且仅当非p有认知担保,这与实际情形不相符——关于p和非p,我们有可能都没有认知担保。为摆脱传统符合论的困境,可以通过列举"老生常谈"的方式,发展一种多元真理论:"真"在不同领域取决于不同的事物——在一个区域内取决于符合,在另一个领域内取决于融贯。"超可断定性"这一概念可以解释这种多元真理论的可行性。     

The Debate: A Strategic Technique

This paper describes the work of a strategic team that came out from behind the one-way mirror. A debate among the team is enacted before the family as a strategy for change. The case of a family that refused to provide information illustrates an application of this method. The debate among the therapists represents a dilemma that is a strategically constructed isomorph of the family situation. From this position, therapists have the option of changing levels between themselves and the family, asking the family to help solve the therapists' dilemma so that they in turn can be free to help the family. The combination of the debate and the change of levels between the therapists and the family creates a therapeutic neutrality for the family. From their meta position, they observe the therapists' struggle to solve the family's problem, which is re-presented as a problem among the therapists. This perspective offers the family the choice of more adaptive solutions to their own dilemma.     

Reacting aggressively to injustice at work: a cognitive stage model

The present article develops a cognitive stage model of workplace aggression, which contends that aggressive reactions to perceived injustice are cognitively construed following three cognitive steps that include the assessment stage, the accountability stage, and the decision stage. These three cognitive stages are essential in understanding victims’ retaliatory actions against perpetrators of injustices. The model’s implications for research and practice are discussed.     

A New Solution to the Recovered Memory Debate

ABSTRACT— The controversy regarding recovered memories of childhood sexual abuse (CSA) has been characterized by two perspectives. According to one perspective, some people repress their memories of abuse because these experiences have been so emotionally traumatic, and they become capable of recalling the CSA only when it is psychologically safe to do so many years later. According to the other perspective, many reports of recovered memories of sexual abuse are false memories, often inadvertently fostered by therapists. In this article, we provide evidence for a third interpretation that applies to a subset of people reporting recollections of CSA; it does not require the concepts of repression, trauma, or false memory. These people did not experience their CSA as traumatic; they either failed to think about their abuse for years or forgot their previous recollections, and they recalled their CSA spontaneously after encountering reminders outside of psychotherapy. Their recovered memories are corroborated at the same rate as those of people who never forgot their abuse. Hence, recalling CSA after many years is not the same thing as having recalled a previously repressed memory of trauma.