What Is Social about Justice? Inclusive Identity and Group Values as the Basis of the Justice Motive

Three studies tested the claim that the justice motive is based on commitment to the perceived values of the “primary category” of potential recipients of an allocation. In Study 1, participants who identified more strongly with their group regarded a member who represented the group's strengths as more entitled to a common profit. In Study 2, participants judged their own entitlement versus that of a member who represented the group's strengths. Members who identified more strongly with their group were less likely to display self-interest in their judgments. In Study 3, participants judged the entitlement of an in-group member representing out-group strengths versus an out-group member representing in-group strengths. When identification with the primary category (including in-group and out-group) was strong, members who identified more strongly with their in-group viewed the out-group member representing in-group values as more deserving.     

SOCIAL COMPARISONS AND CONTENTMENT Exploring the Psychological Costs of the Gender Wage Gapi

This study explored the role of social comparison processes in fostering contentment among those who are objectively disadvantaged. We focus on how comparisons can produce gender differences in personal entitlement, perceptions of one's own performance, and pay satisfaction. We hypothesized that individuals would base judgments of entitlement, performance, and pay satisfaction more on comparisons with ingroup (same-sex) than outgroup (cross-sex) others, even when both types of comparison information were equally available, unavoidable, and made clear the disadvantaged status of the ingroup. As predicted, the amount students felt they were entitled to be paid, how well they thought they had performed (women only), and how satisfied they were with their pay were all influenced more by same-sex than cross-sex comparison information. The implications of these results for the tolerance of injustice among disadvantaged groups are discussed.     

TWO ROUTES TO ELIMINATING GENDER DIFFERENCES IN PERSONAL ENTITLEMENT: Social Comparisons and Performance Evaluations

This analog study examined how the presence and absence of explicit social comparison standards and performance feedback influenced women's and men's perceptions of personal entitlement for pay. In the absence of both comparison information and performance feedback, women felt they deserved less pay than did men. However, these gender differences were eliminated when women and men were exposed to either the same comparison information or the same performance feedback. Path analyses further revealed that the effects of comparison information and performance feedback on judgments of pay fairness and satisfaction were mediated almost exclusively by feelings of entitlement.     

The unique and combined benefits of accuracy and positive bias in relationships

An experiment investigated the independent and combined effects of receiving feedback from romantic partners that varied in both accuracy (i.e., profile agreement) and positive bias, as compared with one's self‐perceptions. Both members of 55 romantically involved couples were randomly assigned to receive either high or low levels of accurate or positively biased feedback ostensibly created from a comparison between their self‐ratings and their partner's appraisals. After receiving this feedback, participants rated how positive and intimate they felt in their relationships. As expected, both accuracy and positive bias in partner feedback had independent positive effects. Importantly, positive bias and accuracy were found to operate additively; participants who received feedback that was simultaneously positively biased and accurate rated their relationships particularly positively.     

The psychological processes underlying symptoms of thought interference in psychosis

Morrison and colleagues have proposed that auditory hallucinations are the result of cognitive intrusions being misattributed to an external source due to such thoughts being inconsistent with the person's beliefs about his or her own mental processes (metacognitive beliefs). The aim of this study was to investigate the applicability of this model to psychotic symptoms of thought interference. Fifty psychotic patients with and without thought interference were compared on (i) frequency of cognitive intrusions, (ii) metacognitive beliefs, (iii) source monitoring and (iv) appraisals of an unrelated anomalous event (a card trick). As predicted, individuals with thought interference had an increased frequency of cognitive intrusions and of maladaptive metacognitive appraisals, lower perceived cognitive control, and were more likely to endorse appraisals regarding 'permeability' of the mind, on the card trick task, in comparison to individuals without thought interference. No significant differences were found on any measure when the patient group was divided into hallucinators and non-hallucinators, once other variables were controlled for. These findings suggest that Morrison's model may be more parsimonious for symptoms of thought interference than for auditory hallucinations.     

Punishing Individuals for Their Infirmities: Effects of Personal Responsibility, Just-World Beliefs, and In-Group/Out-Group Status

This research examined how derogation of cancer victims was moderated by (a) the perceived responsibility of the victim, (b) individual differences in just-world beliefs, and (c) whether the victim was an in-group versus out-group member. Participants formed an impression of an in-group or an out-group member who was known to have a terminal case of cancer. Half of the participants were informed that the target person was partially responsible for this medical condition, whereas the remaining participants were not given this information. Results showed that blaming judgments of high versus low responsibility targets were moderated by just-world beliefs, but this was only true when the person being judged was an out-group member. The implications of these results for research and theory on differential processing of in-group versus out-group members are discussed.     

The Gender Wage Gap: An Explanation of Men’s Elevated Wage Entitlement

Perceptions of wage entitlement differ between women and men such that men are more likely to feel worthy of higher pay. Based on a combination of status-related theories and evidence from two studies of 120 undergraduate men, we examined men’s reactions to gendered threats to their task abilities. When told that women typically outperform men, men responded with elevated projections of their own competence without reducing their self-pay. These effects were not related to endorsements of masculinity ideology. Instead, exaggerated competence was related to individual men’s heightened legitimate entitlement, and resistant high self-pay was linked to narcissistic entitlement. These patterns demonstrate that what appears to be a gender-based phenomenon is explained more accurately by men’s internalized status beliefs.     

Group-Based Trust in Strangers: The Role of Stereotypes and Expectations

ABSTRACT— Across two studies, we provide evidence for group-based trust in strangers. Specifically, when we offered participants a choice between an unknown monetary allocation made by an in-group (university or major) or an out-group allocator, both of whom had total control over the distribution of an identical sum of money, participants strongly preferred the in-group allocator. This preference occurred regardless of whether the stereotype of the in-group was relatively more positive or more negative than that of the out-group. However, this preference did not persist when participants believed that the allocator was unaware of their group membership. Measures of expected share of the allocator's funds support our hypothesis that differential trust of in-group members results from expectations of altruistic and fair behavior toward fellow in-group members rather than from positive stereotypes of the in-group.     

Length of Group Membership, Assumed Similarity, and Opinion Certainty: The Dividend for Veteran Members

Newcomer and veteran fraternity members indicated their own attitudinal position on each of 10 issues and then estimated the positions of either prospective or full in-group members or they received no opportunity to project. All subjects then rated their certainty about their own position on each issue. As expected. both newcomers and veterans assumed greater attitudinal similarity to in-group members than to prospective members. Moreover, projection onto in-group members only increased the opinion certainty of veteran members. Their certainty correlated with the percentage of their friends who were in-group members. Newcomers' certainty increased only after projection onto the lower status recruits. Membership tenure and social identity are discussed in relation to attitudinal projection and the goals of social comparison.     

Why egalitarianism might be good for your health: physiological thriving during stressful intergroup encounters

We compared how evaluations by out-group members and evaluations by in-group members affected participants' stress responses--their neuroendocrine reactivity, cognitive appraisals, and observed anxiety--and how participants' implicit racial bias moderated these responses. Specifically, White participants completed measures of racial bias prior to the experiment. During the experiment, participants performed speech and serial subtraction tasks in front of White or Black interviewers. Several saliva samples were obtained, and they were assayed for catabolic ("breaking down") and anabolic ("building up") hormones. Interviewers' race and participants' racial bias interacted in predicting stress responses. When interviewers were Black, lower racial bias was linked with more salutary stress responses: lower threat appraisals, less anxiety, and increased levels of anabolic hormones. When interviewers were White, no effect was found for threat appraisals or anabolic hormones, and the reverse effect was observed for anxiety. Egalitarianism may have physical and psychological benefits for people living in a diverse society.     

Perceived Legitimacy of a Promotion Decision in Relation to Deservingness,Entitlement, and Resentment in the Context of Affirmative Action and Performance1

This study tests a model relating perceived legitimacy of a promotion committee's decision to the deservingness and entitlement of a male or female candidate for promotion and to resentment about the decision. University students responded to scenarios in which deservingness was manipulated by information about the quality of the candidate's performance; entitlement was manipulated by information about an affirmative‐action policy. Results showed strong positive effects of perceived deservingness on perceived legitimacy, which were partially mediated by resentment. Perceived entitlement was also a positive predictor of perceived legitimacy. Gender bias occurred, especially in regard to resentment and when the male candidate was promoted. The study extends deservingness theory to a new area and provides evidence for the distinction between deservingness and entitlement.     

Metaperceptions of bias in intimate relationships

Meta-awareness of bias in intimate partner judgments was investigated in 3 studies. In Study 1, participants rated fictional partners in happier relationships as more positively biased in their partner perceptions. In Study 2, participants thought their judgments of their own current partners were positively biased and that they were judged by their partners in a positively biased fashion. Using a sample of couples, Study 3 showed that metaperceptions of bias were anchored to actual levels of bias at the individual and relationship levels. In addition, positive bias was accentuated for traits that were more relevant to mate evaluation. These findings (as expected) suggest that positive bias in partner judgments can be a normative and consciously accessible feature of intimate relationships.     

Performance‐based pay is fair,particularly when I perform better: differential fairness perceptions of allocators and recipients

We examined in two experiments the impact of the roles that people enact (allocator or recipient) and performance attributions (talent or effort) on fairness perceptions of pay systems (performance‐based pay or job‐based pay). To test the relative effects of the roles that people enact, in the control conditions, participants were asked to evaluate the fairness of both allocation norms from ‘behind a veil of ignorance’ (Rawls, 1971 ). As hypothesized, the results consistently demonstrate that whereas recipients were biased in their fairness perceptions, allocators tended to be non‐biased in their fairness perceptions. The self‐interest bias among recipients was particularly strong when talent rather than effort attributions were imposed on them. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

“I Didn’t Know It Existed Before You Called”: Protestant Clergy Experience, Education and Perceptions Regarding Genetics

Despite the intrinsic role religious/spiritual (hereafter, R/S) beliefs have in patient clinical decision-making and crisis coping, there is little research exploring the relationship that exists between clergy (professionals who provide R/S counsel and guidance) and genetic counseling patients. This qualitative, exploratory study was designed to explore Protestant clergy (N?=?8) perceptions of and experience with genetics-related issues. Data analysis revealed that a wide range of R/S perceptions regarding genetics-related issues exist within Protestantism, Protestant clergy have a basic understanding of genetic testing and conditions, and while directive counseling is inherent to Protestant clergy counseling, there appears to exist two opposing styles: unbiased and biased. Based on this information, there are two main implications for genetic counseling clinical practice. First, R/S assessments need to be increasingly implemented into genetic counseling sessions, so that the psychosocial needs of patients with specific R/S beliefs can be identified and addressed. An increase in R/S assessments may be accomplished by increased exposure in genetic counselor training, continuing education opportunities, and by establishing relationships with board-certified, professional chaplains. Second, genetic counselors can influence the genetic education and experience of clergy by raising awareness within their own R/S assemblies. Doing so can also serve to further educate genetic counselors in the R/S beliefs of their own traditions, thus increasing sensitivity, empathy and the quality of care provided.     

Social identification structures the effects of perspective taking

Researchers who study perspective taking are generally optimistic about the potential for interventions to improve intergroup perceptions. The current research provides new insight into the conditions that frame the intergroup outcomes of perspective taking. The results show that the effects of perspective taking are not always positive but depend on perspective takers' degree of identification with the in-group. In two experiments, we demonstrated that adopting the perspective of an out-group member can have damaging effects on intergroup perceptions among group members who are highly identified with the in-group. Specifically, compared with less committed members, those who identified highly with the in-group used a greater number of negative traits to describe the out-group following perspective taking. Such perspective taking also led participants with high in-group identification to judge the out-group less favorably. Understanding how social identity concerns frame the outcome of perspective taking is crucial to its effective employment in intergroup-relations programs.     

Social Identity versus Reference Frame Comparisons: The Moderating Role of Stereotype Endorsement

Two studies tested the prediction that belief in a negative stereotype about an in-group will cause members to shift from viewing their in-group as a social identity to viewing it as a frame of reference. The stereotype that was the focus of inquiry was the belief that women have less aptitude at math and spatial tasks than do men. In both studies, female participants took a test of math and spatial ability and then received social comparison information about their abilities relative to a male and a female confederate. In Study 1, participants felt enhanced when the two women outperformed the male confederate, even when this meant that the participants themselves performed worse than the other woman. If participants were first reminded of the negative stereotype, however, they felt best when they outperformed the other woman, even if this meant that the two women performed worse than the man. Study 2 showed that the effects of stereotype activation were especially pronounced among female participants who showed moderate to high levels of stereotype endorsement. These findings suggest that belief in stereotypes about the in-group can lead to in-group comparison and contrast, even in contexts in which a group member's ability level challenges the validity of the stereotype.     

Threatening joy: Approach and avoidance reactions to emotions are influenced by the group membership of the expresser

It has been repeatedly stated that approach and avoidance reactions to emotional faces are triggered by the intention signalled by the emotion. This line of thought suggests that each emotion signals a specific intention triggering a specific behavioural reaction. However, empirical results examining this assumption are inconsistent, suggesting that it might be too short-sighted. We hypothesise that the same emotional expression can signal different social messages and, therefore, trigger different reactions; which social message is signalled by an emotional expression should be influenced by moderating variables, such as the group membership of the expresser. In two experiments, we show that group membership influences approach and avoidance reactions to emotional expressions: Emotions (fear and happiness) expressed by in-group members elicited concordant behaviour, whereas emotions expressed by out-group members activated the reverse pattern. A third experiment, in which participants directly evaluated smiling and fearful individuals resembling in-group and out-group members supported this result.     

Status differences and in-group bias: a meta-analytic examination of the effects of status stability, status legitimacy, and group permeability.

This work examines the moderating effects of status stability, legitimacy, and group permeability on in-group bias among high- and low-status groups. These effects were examined separately for evaluative measures that were relevant as well as irrelevant to the salient status distinctions. The results support social identity theory and show that high-status groups are more biased. The meta-analysis reveals that perceived status stability, legitimacy, and permeability moderate the effects of group status. Also, these variables interacted in their influences on the effect of group status on in-group bias, but this was only true for irrelevant evaluative dimensions. When status was unstable and perceived as illegitimate, low-status groups and high-status groups were equally biased when group boundaries were impermeable, compared with when they were permeable. Implications for social identity theory as well as for intergroup attitudes are discussed.     

The influence of accuracy as a function of leader's bias: the role of trustworthiness in the psychology of procedural justice

The present research examined the combined effect of accuracy of procedures and leader's bias on fairness judgments and the experience of positive emotions. The results of two studies showed that the strongest positive effects on both types of reactions were found when procedures were accurate and the leader was unbiased. In addition, accuracy of procedures only revealed an impact when the leader was perceived as unbiased rather than biased. Moreover, this interactive effect was found to be mediated, at least partly, by perceptions of trustworthiness. These findings show that more research is needed on examining different types of procedural fairness, both as single and combined predictors of people's reactions.