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.     

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.     

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.     

Are Just-World Beliefs Compatible with Justifying Inequality? Collective Political Efficacy as a Moderator

Previous research demonstrates that the belief in a just world is often accompanied by the justification of social inequality and by low socio-political participation (e.g., Jost and Hunyady, Curr Direct Psychol Sci 14:260–265, 2005). However, studies provide evidence that the relations may be moderated by individual differences such as a person’s self-efficacy expectations to promote justice and equality (Mohiyeddini and Montada, Responses to victimization and belief in a just world, 1998). At the societal level, collective political efficacy has consistently been found to foster political participation (cf. Lee, Int J Public Opin Res 22:392–411, 2010). In our study, we tested whether collective political efficacy may attenuate the negative social impact of the belief in a just world: It is predicted that when collective political efficacy is low, a strong belief in a just world would increase the motivation to justify inequality. By contrast, when collective political efficacy is high, the belief in a just world would not increase, but potentially decrease the motivation to justify inequality. In turn, justification of inequality is expected to negatively affect socio-political participation. Data from 150 university students were analyzed using moderated structural equation modeling. In our study, the expected moderating effect of collective political efficacy on the relation between belief in a just world and justification of inequality was established empirically. When collective political efficacy was high, justification of inequality did not inevitably increase with the belief in a just world. In addition, the impact of belief in a just world on justice-promoting behavior was mediated by justification of inequality. Implications for theory and future 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.     

The Role of Just World Beliefs in Responding to the COVID-19 Pandemic

Social Justice Research - This study investigated whether people’s personal belief in a just world (BJW) is linked to their willingness to physically distance themselves from others during...     

Coping with an unjust fate: The case of structural unemployment

Becoming a victim of structural unemployment means suffering an unjust fate. The present research examines the cognitive reactions subjects use to protect their belief in a just world and the related effects on their actual well-being within a sample of unemployed blue-collar workers in East Germany (all female). Results showed that the belief in a just world was positively correlated with attributing one’s unemployment to one’s own behavior and negatively with asking “why me?”, but uncorrelated with subjects’ readiness to change into another profession in order to get employed. Just world belief and depression were negatively related for those who either avoided the “why me?” question or who found an answer to it; but just world belief and depression was positively related for those women ruminating about an unanswered “why me?”. Results are consistent with the idea that the belief in a just world plays a significant role in the unemployed person’s coping process.     

Students’ Personal Belief in a Just World,Well-Being,and Academic Cheating: A Cross-National Study

Social Justice Research - A cross-national study with university students from Germany (n?=?1135) and Turkey (n?=?634) tested whether personal belief in a just world (PBJW)...     

Situational variables or beliefs? A multifaceted approach to understanding blame attributions

Are victim and perpetrator blame attributions affected more by situational-specific variables or observers’ basic motives and personal beliefs? In three experiments, varying the scenario setting, the effects of victim and participant age, participant gender, sympathy for the victim, trust in the justice system, belief in a just world and acceptance of rape myths were investigated. In total, 877 Swedish adolescents and adults read scenarios reflecting common acquaintance rape situations. Victim age (18 or 31) was manipulated, but did not affect attributed blame. Effects of participant age and gender varied markedly across the three experiments. Sympathy for the victim and acceptance of rape myths were stronger predictors than belief in a just world. Consistently, blame attributions were found to be more affected by personal beliefs than situational-specific variables.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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...     

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.     

Finding the proper balance between freedom and justice: why we should not eliminate personal belief exemptions to vaccine mandates

Lantos and colleagues (this issue) propose to eliminate personal belief exemptions from school vaccine mandates, particularly for those vaccines that target deadly contagious childhood disease. They argue that not doing so would be unjust. In this counterpoint, we argue that, for reasons grounded in both health policy and morality, a just vaccine policy need not prohibit parents from claiming personal belief exemptions.     

Impact of Pain on Cognitive Function in Forensic Neuropsychology Context

Chronic pain is a biopsychosocial condition with a complex neuroscientific and neuropsychological literature. Common types of pain that are seen in the medicolegal context include headaches and musculoskeletal and neuropathic pain, all of which are known to affect neuropsychological test results. Differentiating between the cognitive impact of pain and the effects of traumatic brain injury and other factors, such as emotional distress or fatigue, is often challenging, especially in forensic determinations. Cutting through the polarization of forensic examiners’ opinions on the significance and nature of chronic pain impact on neuropsychological function with research evidence can make neuropsychological assessments more objective and defensible in court. This review focuses on surveying and integrating the available vast empirical evidence from neuroscience and neuropsychology regarding the cognitive impact of chronic pain. Our critical review will emphasize the implications of the new evidence for the forensic assessment determinations regarding causality, diagnosis, impact on function, and prognosis and treatment. To this end, electronic search engines, including PubMed, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar (up to January 2018), have been screened and reviewed both for the neuroscience and neuropsychological literature related to chronic pain, and subsequently updated for content and referencing.     

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.     

Vulnerability in Clinical Research with Patients in Pain: A Risk Analysis

Some have characterized patients living with intractable pain as a vulnerable population in both clinical and research settings. Labeling the population as vulnerable, however, does not provide clarity regarding the potential risks that they face when they participate in research. Instead, research vulnerability for patients in pain is a function of an interaction between their pain conditions and elements of the research enterprise. Therefore, the identification of potential risks requires consideration not only of characteristics of patients with chronic pain, but also consideration of features of researchers, the quality of institutional oversight, and the medical/social environment within which the research is conducted. This paper provides an analysis of those risks and provides some suggestions as to how the risks might be better managed.     

Child abuse and chronic pain in a community survey of women

This study examined the relationship between a self-reported history of child physical and sexual abuse and chronic pain among women (N = 3,381) in a provincewide community sample. Chronic pain was significantly associated with physical abuse, education, and age of the respondents and was unrelated to child sexual abuse alone or in combination with physical abuse, mental disorder (anxiety, depression, or substance abuse), or low income. Number of health problems and mental health disorders did not mediate the relationship between physical abuse and chronic pain. Despite considerable evidence from the clinical literature linking exposure to child maltreatment and chronic pain in adulthood, this may well be the first population-based study to investigate this relationship for child physical and sexual abuse independently. The significant association between childhood history of physical abuse and pain in adulthood calls for a greater awareness of the potential for chronic pain problems associated with this type of maltreatment. Further research is needed to understand the mechanism for this complex relationship.     

Altruism Behind Bars: Sharing, Justice, Perspective Taking and Empathy Among Inmates

Anecdotal stories suggest that inmates engage in altruistic acts to partially compensate for past criminal behaviour. Little research has investigated this phenomenon. In this study, we used the dictator game—a measure developed in experimental economics—to assess inmates’ and non-inmates’ altruistic behaviour. Furthermore, we examined whether personal belief in a just world (BJW), perspective taking and empathy predicted altruistic behaviour. Our sample was comprised of 50 male inmates and 50 age-matched non-inmates. Results showed that inmates displayed more altruistic behaviour and higher empathy compared to non-inmates. In addition, in inmates altruistic behaviour was positively predicted by BJW and perspective taking, whereas in non-inmates altruistic behaviour was positively predicted by empathy. Theoretical and practical implications are further discussed.