Ecological Belief in a Just World

To date, there is considerable evidence that the perception of injustice influences environmental behavior in a positive way. Nevertheless, some people do not take action, even if the injustice seems obvious. Concerning this matter, approaches like the belief in a just world theory or system justification theory provide an explanation. However, so far, there is no scientific research on whether the perception of ecological justice, which is taken for granted, concerning an ecological belief in a just world (EBJW) may lead to differences in people’s environmental behavior. This paper investigates a newly conceived construct of the EBJW, regarding its occurrence as well as its disposition in the context of other constructs. Therefore, a new scale has been developed for the purpose of this study by means of a questionnaire with German citizens (n = 312) examining motives for energy-relevant behavior. The scale analyses confirm the validity of the new scale. Even though the EBJW did not score high in the total sample, possibly due to significant differences between the participants (particularly socio-demographic variables and different group memberships) it can be stated that there is definitely a relationship between the EBJW and justification arguments and, ultimately, a lack of responsibility for energy saving. Regression analyses reveal that the EBJW, together with cognitive and affective appraisals of justice, can explain energy-relevant commitment, such as engagement in behavior that has negative impact on the climate. Based on these findings, it is suggested that the EBJW is measurable and that it seems to warrant further research.     

A Latent Factor Approach to Belief in a Just World and its Association with Well-Being

Social Justice Research - Drawing on justice motive theory (Lerner et al. in Berkowitz and Walster (eds) Advances in experimental social psychology. Academic Press, New York, 1976), in the present...     

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.     

Belief in a Just World and Commitment to Long-Term Deserved Outcomes

We investigated whether people need to believe in a just world in part because such a belief helps people to work toward long-term goals and to do so in such a way that they are deserved. We assessed participants' long-term goal focus and also their commitment to deserving their outcomes (via a psychopathy scale). In a second session, participants were then exposed to a victim whose situation did or did not contradict a belief in a just world. When the victim's situation contradicted a belief in a just world, the greater the participants' tendency to focus on long-term outcomes, the more they blamed the victim for her misfortune; but this relation only occurred for participants with a strong commitment to deserving their outcomes (i.e., those low in psychopathy). The results are consistent with our argument that, given the function of the belief in a just world proposed in this article, people would have a greater need to preserve the belief (e.g., by blaming victims of injustice) the greater their investment in long-term and deserved outcomes.     

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.     

Effects of Victimization on the Belief in a Just World in Four Ex-Yugoslavian Countries

Levels of support for just world beliefs among young adults (N = 598) from four ex-Yugoslavian countries—Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and Slovenia—were compared, taking into account victimization experiences and the general belief in a just world. Being a victim affected an individual’s belief in a just world in the two less economically favored contexts: Victims of exclusion in Macedonia and victims of war in Bosnia and Herzegovina were less likely to believe in a just world than non-victims. These victimization variables partly explained why the mean scores of these two countries were less than those of the two others. A deleterious effect of cumulative negative events on belief in a just world was identified, in parallel with a lower endorsement of the belief when the first victimization occurred more recently.     

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.     

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.     

Belief in a Just World,Causal Attributions,and Adjustment to Sexual Violence

What influence do the personal belief in a just world (i.e., the perception that one usually gets what one deserves) and different kinds of causal attributions have on adjustment to sexual violence? Using a sample of N = 62 victims of sexual aggression (mean age = 21.7) it was shown that respondents were better able to adjust to their experience of sexual violence the higher their personal belief in a just world. Moreover, the more respondents attributed their victimization to situational circumstances (external attributions) and the less they attributed their victimization to their character and personality (characterological self-attributions), the less they felt distressed by past victimization. The degree to which participants attributed their victimization to their own concrete behavior (behavioral self-attribution) was not related to their adjustment. Further analyses showed that the influence of the personal belief in a just world was mediated by the three attribution styles. Additionally, the adaptiveness of external attributions was moderated by participants’ just world belief.     

Justice in Our World and in that of Others: Belief in a Just World and Reactions to Victims

Framed by the Belief in a Just World theory (BJW; Lerner, M. J. (1980). Belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York: Plenum Publishing Corporation), this article presents two studies that analyze people’s reactions to the suffering of victims belonging to an ingroup and an outgroup. In Study 1, participants viewed a videotaped film containing the victimization story. The victim was presented as a non-categorized, ingroup or outgroup (Gypsy) victim. Threat to BJW was measured using the modified Stroop task developed by Hafer (J Pers Soc Psychol 79:165–173, 2000). In the second study, a non-victimization story was introduced and a 2 (victim, non-victim) × 2 (ingroup, outgroup) between-subjects design was used. Both studies show that the ingroup victim is more threatening to the BJW than the outgroup victim. The expected secondary victimization of the ingroup victim was only obtained in the second study when a non-obtrusive derogation measure was used.

The Social Value of Expressing Personal and General Belief in a Just World in Different Contexts

Research conducted in France and Portugal has consistently found that expressing high versus low Belief in a Personal Just World (BJW-P) is more socially valued. Results concerning the Belief in a General Just World (BJW-G) have been mixed. We propose this reflects a higher resistance of BJW-P social value to contextual changes. Testing this idea was the main goal of three experimental studies conducted in France, Germany and Portugal. In Study 1 (N = 283) participants expressed higher BJW-G when asked to convey a positive versus a negative image in a job application at a bank. The opposite pattern showed up when they applied for a job at a Human Rights NGO, an employment assistance institution and a trade union. Participants expressed higher BJW-P in all contexts, except at the trade union (no significant differences). In Study 2 (N = 489) participants judged bogus candidates who expressed high or low BJW-P/G while applying for a job at the same contexts. The patterns of judgments replicated those of self-presentations in Study 1. In Study 3 (N = 158), participants were asked to judge targets who expressed high versus moderate versus low BJW-P at a trade union. The former target was more socially valued than the other two. High versus low BJW-P expression was associated with higher stamina and less unadjusted self-enhancement. We conclude that in Western societies the expression of BJW-P is more central to the legitimation of the status quo and that of BJW-G is more context sensitive.     

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 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.     

Personal Versus General Belief in a Just World,Karma, and Well-Being: Evidence from Thailand and the UK

Social Justice Research - The belief in a just world (BJW) is the belief that people get what they deserve and deserve what they get. The theory and research findings suggest that believing the...     

Catastrophizing Mediates the Relationship Between the Personal Belief in a Just World and Pain Outcomes Among Chronic Pain Support Group Attendees

Health-related research suggests the belief in a just world can act as a personal resource that protects against the adverse effects of pain and illness. However, currently, little is known about how this belief, particularly in relation to one’s own life, might influence pain. Consistent with the suggestions of previous research, the present study undertook a secondary data analysis to investigate pain catastrophizing as a mediator of the relationship between the personal just world belief and chronic pain outcomes in a sample of chronic pain support group attendees. Partially supporting the hypotheses, catastrophizing was negatively correlated with the personal just world belief and mediated the relationship between this belief and pain and disability, but not distress. Suggestions for future research and intervention development are made.     

On Mimicry and the Psychology of the Belief in a Just World: Imitating the Behaviors of Others Reduces the Blaming of Innocent Victims

Innocent victims of crime are often blamed for what happened to them. In this article, we examine the hypothesis that victim blaming can be significantly reduced when people mimic the behavior of the victim or even a person unrelated to the crime. Participants watched a person on a video after which we assessed the extent of their spontaneous mimicry reactions (Study 1) or participants were instructed to mimic or not to mimic the movements of this person (Study 2). Then, they were informed about a rape and criminal assault and judged the degree to which they thought the victims were responsible for the crime. One of the crimes happened to the same person as the person they previously did or did not mimic. The other crime happened to a person unrelated to the mimicry situation. Results of both studies revealed that previously mimicking the victim or an unrelated person reduced the degree to which victims were being blamed.     

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.     

Beliefs in a Just World as a Buffer Against Anger

Anger is the emotion typically accompanying unfairness appraisals. Belief in a just world (BJW) was expected to buffer against angry feelings because subjects high in BJW play down unfairness, justify unfairness as being self-inflicted, and avoid self-focused rumination. Three studies were run to test this hypothesis. A questionnaire study revealed that subjects who strongly endorse the belief in a personally just world are less likely to experience anger and, if they do experience such feelings, are less likely to suppress them. In two experiments, an angry, a happy, or a sad mood was induced. In the anger-evoking condition, subjects high in BJW were less angry and suffered no decrease in self-esteem compared to subjects low in BJW, who reported increased feelings of anger and decreased self-esteem. It is concluded that individuals high in BJW are better able to cope with anger-evoking situations, and that BJW can be seen as a personal resource protecting not only mental but also physical health.     

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