Specifying the information effect: reference points and procedural justifications affect legal attitudes in four survey experiments

Journal of Experimental Criminology - Providing detailed information about sentencing reduces punitive attitudes of laymen (the information effect). We assess whether this extends to modest...     

The plundering of Zambian resources by Frederick Chiluba and his friends: A case study of the interaction between national politics and the international drive towards good governance

This article analyses the accusations that have emerged since2001 of predatory behaviour during the presidency of FrederickT. Chiluba (1991–2001). It advocates a detailed analysisof the practices that have come to light in order to move beyonda generalized interpretation of the persistence of predatoryelites in Africa. Three specific themes appear. First, thereis a danger of oversimplification of these conflicts as betweenthe international community and national governments. The politicalstruggles tend to be more complicated than generally presented,and international involvement meshes with local political struggles.Second, predatory behaviour or corruption is a social processthat is embedded in wider national and international networks.It is therefore difficult to locate culpability exactly in clearlydesignated protagonists. Third, there is a danger of imputingan economic and political rationality to this behaviour whichmay best be designated as theft. The overall theme of the articleis that there are important national cultural influences inthe way these predatory practices are dealt with. These areobfuscated by a blander critique identifying partial reformthat leaves predatory elites untouched.     

When Fairness is Especially Important: Reactions to Being Inequitably Paid in Communal Relationships

This article focuses on when justice is especially important to people and, in doing so, explores the social conditions under which the importance of justice may change in social interactions. More specifically, the authors examine how different types of relationships affect evaluations of equitable and inequitable situations. It is argued that when people are confronted with friends as interaction partners, as opposed to unknown others, they are motivated to attend to the needs of their friends (Clark & Mills, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 12–24, 1979) and, therefore, they are not only concerned with their own outcomes, but also with their friends’ outcomes. As predicted on the basis of this line of reasoning, two experiments demonstrate that when people’s interaction partners are friends, people are indeed more satisfied with being underpaid and less satisfied with being overpaid compared to when their interaction partners are unknown others. In the discussion, it is argued that these findings suggest that justice is especially important to people when they are in communal relationships.

On Justice Knowledge Activation: Evidence for Spontaneous Activation of Social Justice Inferences

This article focuses on how people infer the justness of events they encounter. Earlier justice research typically asked participants explicitly for their justice judgments. More recent research provided evidence for the possibility of spontaneous judgment inferences. The present research extends this study in three important ways: it provides strong evidence that (1) spontaneous social justice inferences can occur in multiple research paradigms, (2) these inferences constitute a process separate from spontaneous general evaluation of valence, and (3) spontaneous justice inferences covary with individual differences in sensitivity to justice. We provide evidence for these three conclusions by means of important implicit measurement research paradigms that we specifically tailored to study justice inferences: the probe recognition paradigm and the grid-relearning paradigm. We discuss the implications of our findings for both the literatures on justice and spontaneous inferences.     

A Self-Activation Hypothesis of Affective Reactions to Fair and Unfair Events: Evidence for Supraliminal and Subliminal Processes

Building and extending on justice theories and work on self-regulation, the current paper proposes a self-activation hypothesis of affective reactions to fair and unfair events, stating that in circumstances in which people’s selves are activated, stronger affective reactions to fair and unfair events are more likely, compared to circumstances in which people’s selves are not or less strongly activated. Findings of two experiments indeed show that simply activating the self (supraliminally or even subliminally) amplifies affective reactions to fair and unfair procedures (Experiment 1) and fair and unfair outcomes (Experiment 2). These findings thus reveal the important role of activation of the self for understanding fairness reactions. In the discussion, we note the relevance of our self-activation hypothesis for insights into different accounts formulated in the justice domain.