Women, anger, and aggression: an interpretative phenomenological analysis

This study reports a qualitative phenomenological investigation of anger and anger-related aggression in the context of the lives of individual women. Semistructured interviews with five women are analyzed using interpretative phenomenological analysis. This inductive approach aims to capture the richness and complexity of the lived experience of emotional life. In particular, it draws attention to the context-dependent and relational dimension of angry feelings and aggressive behavior. Three analytic themes are presented here: the subjective experience of anger, which includes the perceptual confusion and bodily change felt by the women when angry, crying, and the presence of multiple emotions; the forms and contexts of aggression, paying particular attention to the range of aggressive strategies used; and anger as moral judgment, in particular perceptions of injustice and unfairness. The authors conclude by examining the analytic observations in light of phenomenological thinking.     

The World is More Just for Me than Generally: About the Personal Belief in a Just World Scale's Validity

Differences between personal and general belief in a just world were studied in four questionnaire studies and one experiment. Personal just world belief could reliably be differentiated from general just world belief, and subjects endorsed more strongly the personal compared to the general just world belief. Moreover, personal belief in a just world predicted subjective well-being and self-esteem, and this positive impact was independent of general just world belief and favorable self-perceptions. Finally, the more subjects were aware of their own unfairness, the more the personal belief in a just world showed a negative impact on self-esteem. Results give evidence to the just world beliefs' character as world views and as indicators of a personal contract between individual and social world.     

The Meaning of Students’ Personal Belief in a Just World for Positive and Negative Aspects of School-Specific Well-Being

In two cross-sectional questionnaire studies with N = 1792 German and Indian students, aged between 12 and 17 years, we investigated the relation between personal belief in a just world (BJW) and positive as well as negative dimensions of school-specific well-being. Furthermore, we considered students’ personal experience of teacher justice as possible mediator in this relation and controlled for confounding effects of gender, neuroticism, and locus of control. In Study 1, we used multilevel modeling to analyze the German data and to control for class-level effects. In accordance with our hypotheses, Study 1 showed that the more students believed in a personal just world, the better their positive attitudes toward school, their academic self-esteem, and their enjoyment in school were, and the less somatic complaints in school, social problems in school, and worries toward school they experienced. These associations partly differed between classes, but generally persisted when controlled for sex, neuroticism, and locus of control. Finally, the association between personal BJW and well-being was at least partly mediated by students’ personal experience of teacher justice. In Study 2, we focused on the generalizability of the pattern of results across different cultural contexts. However, we did not aim to carry out comparative research. Results from bootstrap mediation analyses were predominantly the same as in Study 1. The adaptive functions of BJW and implications for future school research are discussed.     

Belief in a Just World as a Resource of Victimized Students

In a cross-sectional questionnaire study with N?=?2593 German students, aged between 12 and 17 years (M?=?14.1, SD?=?0.5), we investigated the relation between students’ personal belief in a just world (BJW) and their victimization in bullying situations. According to the just-world theory and research, we expected that the more strongly the students endorsed the personal BJW, the less likely they were to report being victimized by other students. We aimed to extend previous findings that failed to confirm this negative relation by considering students’ personal experience of teacher justice as a possible mediator in this relation, while statistically controlling for sex and school type. We further considered the nested data structure with regard to school classes in our analyses. The results of latent mediation analyses at the individual and group levels showed that the more the students endorsed personal BJW, the more they evaluated their teachers’ behavior toward them personally as being just, and the less likely they were to report that they were bullied. However, the students’ personal experience of teacher justice did not mediate the relation between personal BJW and victimization at the individual or group level when controlled for sex and school type. We discussed the adaptive functions of BJW and implications for future school research and practice.     

Sanctions,Perceived Anger,and Criminal Offending

In articulating models of offender decision-making, researchers have tended to focus on either deterrence/rational choice or situational/emotional considerations. In this paper, we merge these two lines of inquiry and examine how rational choice considerations and perceived angry reactions inter-relate in predicting assaultive violence. Using data collected on a random sample of young adults, we assess three hypotheses. First, that both rational choice and perceived anger exhibit additive effects on assault. Second, that perceived anger influences how rational choice considerations are interpreted. Third, that rational choice considerations influence assault under different levels of perceived anger, and in particular, that the effect of sanction threats fall apart under high perceived anger. Future theoretical and empirical directions are outlined.     

Blame attributions and rape: Effects of belief in a just world and relationship level

Purpose. The blaming of rape victims can cause secondary victimization. It is of importance to investigate factor that might lead to victim blaming. This study investigated the effect of belief in a just world (BJW), gender of participant, and level of relationship closeness between victim and perpetrator on attributions of both victim and perpetrator blame. Methods. In a between‐subjects experiment, a community sample (N= 166) answered questions of victim blame and perpetrator blame after reading one of four scenarios, each depicting a different level of relationship between the victim and the perpetrator (strangers, acquaintances, dating, or married). Results. Overall, high levels of perpetrator blame and low levels of victim blame were found. Contrary to previous research, the victim of a stranger rape was blamed more than when the perpetrator was known to the victim. Furthermore, participants high on BJW attributed higher levels of victim blame and lower levels of perpetrator blame. Specifically, female participants high on BJW attributed most blame to a victim of stranger rape. Conclusions. In conclusion, BJW was a significant predictor of blame attributions, and relationship type is a variable that merits further research.     

The Effects of Belief in a Just World and Victim's Innocence on Secondary Victimization,Judgements of Justice and Deservingness

Several studies have shown that victims judged to be innocent are more liked and helped by observers than victims judged to be noninnocent. Nevertheless, objectively innocent victims are very often secondarily victimized (blamed, devalued, avoided, or have their suffering minimized), and judged as deserving or as being in a just situation. An impressive amount of literature shows that high believers in a just world victimize the victims more than low believers, judge them as more deserving and think they are in a fairer situation. But the evaluation of the joint impact of the innocence of the victim and of the observers' BJW (belief in a just world) on the observers' reactions to the victim has been left undone. This study aims to throw some light on this subject. An experimental study was conducted using a 2 BJW (high; low) by 2 victim's innocence (innocent; noninnocent) between-subjects design. No interaction effects were found, but the forms of secondary victimization, as well as the judgements of justice and deservingness, were more positively correlated in the condition where the threat to BJW is higher.     

The perceived relationship between the belief in a just world and sociopolitical ideology

Lerner (1977, 1980) located the origins of the belief in a just world (BJW) in both individual motivational needs and social learning. To address the lack of subsequent research or discussion on possible social origins of the BJW, this paper investigates the social meaning of the BJW in the context of sociopolitical ideology. 173 participants, who defined themselves as politically right-wing, moderate/liberal, or left-wing, completed the BJW scale (Rubin and Peplau, 1975) twice, once from their own viewpoint and once from the perspective of either a right-wing or a left-wing person. Participants differed in their own BJW according to their political beliefs, but were able at the same time to predict consensually another person's just world beliefs on the basis of a political label, independently of their own political orientation. These findings clearly demonstrate social aspects of the belief in a just world and therefore raise the possibility of a normative, socially constructed basis for it.     

The relationship of compliance with anxiety,self-esteem,paranoid thinking and anger

Abstract

The aim of the study was to assess the relationship of compliance with anxiety, self-esteem, paranoid thinking, and anger. The Gudjonsson Compliance Scale (GCS), the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, the Paranoia/Suspiciousness Questionnaire (PSQ), and the Novaco Anger Scale (NAS) were administered to 167 University students Compliance correlated positively with state and trait anxiety, low self-esteem, paranoia and suspiciousness, and negatively with acting out feelings of anger (the Behavioural Domain of the NAS). Multiple regression of the test scores showed that paranoid thinking was the single best predictor of compliance. The implications are discussed. It is important to replicate the study on special populations, such as offenders and psychiatric patients, who have problems with low self-esteem, paranoid thinking, and anger.     

Self-reported anger among individuals with an autism spectrum disorder detained in high security psychiatric care: do preoccupations have an influence?

The State Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI 2) is a widely used measure of the experience and expression of anger within forensic populations. Despite anger expression difficulties being common among individuals with an Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), little is known as to how those who offend perform in the STAXI 2. In exploring the application of the STAXI 2 to individuals with an ASD, two groups detained in high security psychiatric care were compared. Results suggest that whilst those with offending unconnected to a preoccupation have more complex psychiatric presentations, MANOVAs revealed no differences in demographic and cognitive characteristics. Within the Autism Spectrum Quotient, those with offending linked to a preoccupation score higher in the attending to details scale and in the STAXI 2 reported significantly lower levels of ‘anger expression out’. It is proposed that an examination of anger is useful for all individuals with an ASD who offend.     

Sensitivity to befallen injustice and reactions to unfair treatment in a laboratory situation

At Time 1, 171 students were administered questionnaires for measuring sensitivity to befallen injustice (SBI), trait anger, anger in, anger out, anger control, self-assertiveness, and attitudes toward principles of distributive justice (equality of chances, equity). Two months later (Time 2), 75 of these subjects were treated unfairly in a laboratory situation dealing with competition and achievement behavior. Two justice principles were violated: the equality of chances principle and the equity principle. Four weeks later (Time 3), 32 subjects evaluated the unfair treatment in retrospect. All three occasions were presented as independent studies with the subjects perceiving no connection between them. In line with our hypotheses, we found that immediate and delayed reactions to the unjust treatments depended to a considerable degree on SBI. For example, the combined score of the SBI questionnaire predicted, with a beta weight of .71, a combined rating of three experts who used various sources of objective information (e.g., tape-recorded interactions between subject and experimenter) to estimate the degree to which the subject displayed emotional, verbal, and behavioral resentment against the unfair treatment. At the same time, measures for other constructs (e.g., assertiveness, trait anger, anger expression), which can also be linked theoretically to the criteria, explained either none or a much smaller proportion of variance in reactions to unjust treatment.     

Russian Adaptations of General and Personal Belief in a Just World Scales: Validation and Psychometric Properties

In a questionnaire study, Russian versions of the General and Personal belief in a just world (BJW) Scales were validated. Results from exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis showed that the Personal BJW Scale could be empirically differentiated from the General BJW Scale; however, both scales correlated positively. Good internal consistencies of both scales were demonstrated. Age was positively correlated with personal BJW but not with general BJW. Gender differences were found neither in personal nor in general BJW. Personal BJW was found to be stronger than general BJW. Convergent validity was tested by inspecting correlations of BJW scales with the Basic World Assumptions Scale. Divergent validity was examined by inspecting correlations with Markers for the Big Five Factor Structure Scale and Justice Sensitivity Scales. Both personal and general BJW showed positive connections with all subscales of the Basic World Assumptions Scale (self-worth, benevolence of world, justice, luck, and control). We demonstrated divergent validity of personal BJW regarding intellect, agreeableness, conscientiousness, beneficiary and perpetrator sensitivity, and divergent validity of general BJW regarding intellect, beneficiary, perpetrator, and observer sensitivity. Both BJW dimensions were unrelated to beneficiary and perpetrator sensitivity. In addition, general BJW was not related to observer sensitivity. Results give evidence for satisfactory psychometric properties and validation of the Russian versions of BJW scales.     

The effect of respondents' just world beliefs and target person's social worth and awareness-of-risk on perceptions of a person with AIDS

The present research examined how individuals' just world beliefs affected their perceptions of a person with AIDS who was depicted as having contracted the HIV virus while either aware or unaware of health risks, and who was defined as either high or low in general social deservingness or worth. Dependent variables included respondents' affective reactions to the person with AIDS, their willingness to allocate resources to him, and their perception of the fairness or the unfairness both of his general plight and that various types of resources be given to him. Results indicated that those who were higher in just world beliefs were more emotionally negative to the other with AIDS, they were less willing to contribute resources to him, and they felt that it was less fair that such resource transfers be required. Similar response patterns were found when the other with AIDS was described as lower in social worth and when he was depicted as having contracted AIDS with full awareness of health risks. Implications of the findings were discussed in terms of how psychological theories of justice might inform health care policy.     

Brazilian Adolescents’ Just World Beliefs and Its Relationships with School Fairness,Student Conduct,and Legal Authorities

Prior research has demonstrated that adolescence is a sensitive period to develop their belief in a just world (BJW), both general and personal. Research has found significant relationships between BJW, perceptions of school fairness, student conduct, and perceptions of legal authorities. However, no research has combined these constructs in one model to get a broader picture of how adolescents construct their worldview of fairness and how this influences their compliance with authorities. This study analyzed 475 Brazilian adolescents across three schools. A partially mediated and a mediated model were tested to determine if students’ BJW relate directly or indirectly to student conduct and perceptions of legal authorities through school fairness. The partially mediated model best fit the data. Personal BJW predicted students’ perceptions of the school fairness, which predicted student conduct. General BJW and school fairness predicted adolescents’ perceptions of legal authorities. Perceptions of school fairness are influenced by Personal BJW and are predictive of students’ conduct and opinions of legal authorities. By analyzing multiple constructs simultaneously, this study provides a picture of how these overlapping conceptualizations of justice interact. Students who do not believe their school is fair are less likely to respect and abide by the rules and are more likely to also expect unfair treatment from law enforcement and judicial officials. This study points to the importance of students’ perceptions of justice at school and highlights the far-reaching implications of students who do not perceive or expect justice in their lives.     

The Belief in a Just World and Personality: A Meta-analysis

Several meta-analyses using twelve studies were conducted, combining different forms of the belief in a just world (BJW) and the five-factor model in order to determine possible relationships between personality factors and individual differences regarding justice. As expected, the general (n = 2579) and personal (n = 1346) forms of BJW were negatively associated with neuroticism, and positively associated with extraversion and agreeableness. Summary effect sizes for neuroticism, extraversion, and agreeableness were r = ?0.08, r = 0.10, and r = 0.09 concerning the general BJW, and r = ?0.25, r = 0.18, and r = 0.10 concerning the personal BJW, respectively. Although no causality could be determined, possible interpretations of the relationships include BJW as a personal resource that increases emotional stability, BJW and extraversion’s reciprocity in the developmental process, and trust as an origin of both agreeableness and just world beliefs. In addition, the associations were significantly stronger when the personal BJW was used, as opposed to the general form, but only regarding neuroticism and extraversion. Attitudes concerning others and their well-being may explain the differential gap of associations when using BJW for the self or for others.     

Justice Beliefs in School: Distinguishing Ultimate and Immanent Justice

This paper combines two recent developments in just world research: the conception of belief in a just world (BJW) as a resource for coping and well-being in everyday life, and the distinction between two different facets of BJW, namely belief in immanent justice (BIJ) and belief in ultimate justice (BUJ). Moreover, these two aspects are adapted to the school context and educational psychology. Scales for measuring ultimate and immanent justice in schools were developed within a German pilot reform project with a sample of 1274 pupils. The two facets could be distinguished by means of factor analysis. The reliability of the two scales is satisfactory, and their validity is confirmed by their differential correlational patterns. Results show that not every form of BJW automatically functions as a coping resource. In fact, only BUJ is able to protect pupils' mental well-being, whereas immanent justice can actually jeopardize well-being. Similarly, BUJ is associated with the perception of solidarity and learning enjoyment in class, whereas BIJ is more closely associated with the experience of rivalry and competition in class. Finally, the socialization of the two justice beliefs is considered. The cross-sectional data provide some evidence to suggest that friendly and supportive parenting styles can promote BUJ, whereas strict parenting styles may further BIJ. More longitudinal research is needed to obtain further insights into these phenomena.     

When Will a Victim Be Secondarily Victimized? The Effect of Observer's Belief in a Just World,Victim's Innocence and Persistence of Suffering

According to the belief in a just world (BJW) theory, the most threatening victim for the observers' BJW is the innocent victim whose suffering persists. Consequently the innocent victim whose suffering persists should be more secondarily victimized by high-BJW participants than by low-BJW participants. However, research has never systematically tested this basic prediction of the theory. In these two studies we tried to determine the impact of the observer's BJW, the victim's innocence, and the persistence of the victim's suffering on secondary victimization. In study 1, an interaction between BJW and victim's innocence was found on the attractiveness of the victim. In study 2, an interaction between BJW, victim's innocence, and persistence of suffering was found on the derogation of the victim.     

Justifying Inequality: A Cross-Temporal Investigation of U.S. Income Disparities and Just-World Beliefs from 1973 to 2006

This cross-temporal meta-analysis examined 6,120 American college students’ scores on the Belief in a Just World Scale (BJW; Rubin and Peplau, J Soc Issues 31(3):65–90, 1975) across the last three and a half decades. Drawing on models of belief threat, we examined whether the causal relationship between perceived injustice and increases in BJW could extend from the laboratory to society by using macro-economic injustice trends to predict changes in BJW across these decades. Specifically, we hypothesized that perceptions of inequality, operationalized as rising income disparities, would result in a greater need to justify this inequality and that this would be evidenced by increased commitment to just world beliefs over time. Consistent with this prediction, BJW scores increased significantly over time and this increase was positively related to increasing income disparities in society. Income inequality remained a significant predictor of BJW scores even after controlling for additional factors of general income and political ideology. Implications of increasing just world beliefs are discussed in terms of psychological and policy outcomes.     

On the Normativity of Expressing the Belief in a Just World: Empirical Evidence

There is a large body of evidence that the belief in a just world (BJW) affects people’s behaviors and attitudes, either through secondary victimization of innocent victims or the promotion of helping behavior. In this article, we aim to address the normativity of the very expression of BJW. Results of two experimental studies show that the expression of a higher degree of BJW is more socially valued than that of a lower one. We argue that this pattern should not only be seen as deriving from intrapersonal motivation to see the world as a predictable place, but also as a norm which seems to be perceived as having both social utility and desirability. The research reported in this article was supported by grant SFRHD/BD/10816/2002 awarded to Hélder Alves by Fundacao para a Ciência e Tecnologia. We thank Jorge Vala, Melvin Lerner, and Sven Waldzus for their suggestions during this research and to Kees van den Bos, José-Miguel Fernández-Dols and Cícero Pereira for their comments on previous versions of this article.     

Mediators of the Relation Between Beliefs in a Just World and Emotional Responses to Negative Outcomes

Research shows that strong believers in a just world respond with less negative and more positive emotion to their own negative outcomes than do weak believers. The present study investigated mediators of this relation. We proposed that strong believers in a just world (versus weak believers) would make stronger internal and weaker external attributions for their negative outcomes, leading to reduced perceived unfairness, which, in turn, was expected to lead to less negative and more positive emotion. We assessed the just world beliefs of a sample of undergraduates as well as measuring their cognitive and emotional responses to an exam grade. Mediational analyses showed that our data were consistent with the processes proposed above. Various cognitive and motivational interpretations of the present findings are discussed