			Home About us Contact

Just World (just + world)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Psychology	88%

Selected Abstracts

Socioeconomic Status and Belief in a Just World: Sentencing of Criminal Defendants,

JOURNAL OF APPLIED SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 10 2006
Naomi J. Freeman
The present study investigated whether defendants' socioeconomic status (SES) and jurors' beliefs in a just world affected punishment and blame decisions. The study's 273 participants completed the Just World Scale (Rubin & Peplau, 1975) and read a case scenario describing an aggravated murder. Participants rendered a verdict and answered questions concerning confidence, responsibility, and degree of guilt. Analyses partially supported the hypothesis. High believers in a just world were more likely to assign higher degrees of guilt and to sentence low SES defendants more severely than high SES or no SES information defendants. [source]

Belief in a Just World and Jury Decisions in a Civil Rape Trial

JOURNAL OF APPLIED SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 5 2000
Linda A. Foley
When people's belief in a just world (BJW) is challenged, it can be restored by attributing blame to the victim or alleviating the victim's suffering. In criminal cases, jurors can attribute responsibility to victims, but cannot alleviate suffering. Participants (n= 106) heard a taped civil rape case. The effect of age of plaintiff, gender of participant, and type of participant on mock jurors' reactions to a plaintiff were examined. Participants evaluated responsibility of plaintiff and awarded monetary damages. It was hypothesized that, given this opportunity to compensate the victim, jurors would be less likely to derogate the victim. As hypothesized, women with high and low BJW attributed the same level of responsibility to the plaintiff but those with a high BJW awarded more monetaly damages. Men with high BJW awarded much less in damages than did men with low BJW. The just-world theory appears to explain many of the decisions made by mock jurors. [source]

Attitudes Toward the Poor and Attributions for Poverty

JOURNAL OF SOCIAL ISSUES, Issue 2 2001
Catherine Cozzarelli
Prior psychological research on attitudes toward the poor has focused almost exclusively on the attributions people make to explain why individuals are poor (e.g., Smith & Stone, 1989; Zucker & Weiner, 1993). The goal of the current study was to investigate the relationships among feelings about the poor and poverty, stereotypes of the poor, attributions for poverty, and sociopolitical ideologies (as assessed by the Protestant Ethic, Belief in a Just World, and Right Wing Authoritarianism Scales). In our Midwestern college sample (n = 209), attitudes toward the poor were found to be significantly more negative than attitudes toward the middle class. In addition, participants were most likely to blame poor people them-selves for their poverty. However, attitudes toward the poor and attributions for the causes of poverty were found to vary among individuals from different sociodemographic backgrounds and by degree of endorsement of Protestant ethic, just world, and authoritarianism beliefs. Few gender differences were obtained. [source]

Claiming HIV Infection From Improbable Modes as a Possible Coping Strategy

JOURNAL OF APPLIED SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 2 2010
David A. Moskowitz
Despite the extreme improbability of contracting HIV from oral intercourse, individuals continue to claim seroconversion via such behaviors. Among a sample of HIV-positive men who have sex with men (MSM), those who attributed contracting HIV from oral intercourse or other non-anal intercourse sexual behaviors were 5 times more likely to be a racial minority and 2 times more likely to be of lower socioeconomic status. Those believing less in a just world were 2 times more likely to attribute contracting HIV from non-anal intercourse sexual behaviors. Attributing HIV contraction to improbable modes may be an attractive coping strategy to deflect the stigma more intensely felt among poorer, minority HIV-positive MSM, and among men who are sensitive to fairness and justice. [source]

Socioeconomic Status and Belief in a Just World: Sentencing of Criminal Defendants,

Belief in a Just World and Jury Decisions in a Civil Rape Trial

Self-Reliance and Empathy: The Enemies of Poverty,and of the Poor

POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 3 2001
Robert E. Lane
Starting with a brief review of why all post-industrial societies tend to be inegalitarian, this paper develops two main themes: (1) how the idea that people are individually responsible for their own fates reduces poverty but impedes redistribution, and (2) how both the loose ties of individuals to their societies and the selective nature of their empathy and pity for others reduces compassion for the poor, making redistribution unlikely. The first theme is elaborated through psychological research on dispositional versus circumstantial attributions, showing their effects on the widely shared belief in a just world and more generally on the prevailing theory of the justice of deserts. The attribution-affect-action model is used to show how dispositional attributes evoke either anger or pity for victims and, if anger, then unwillingness to help. The development of the second theme shows how people divorce their own fates from those of their nations, how the basic tendency to favor the familiar and similar limits support for redistribution, how converting concern regarding deprivations of the self to concern for (fraternal) deprivation of people like the self excludes those who most need help, how envy fails to lead to redistribution, and finally, how people's ideas of the privileged and the disadvantaged reflect market values and often mark the poor and the different as overprivileged. [source]

The impact of death qualification, belief in a just world, legal authoritarianism, and locus of control on venirepersons' evaluations of aggravating and mitigating circumstances in capital trials,

BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES & THE LAW, Issue 1 2007
Brooke Butler Ph.D.
The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of death qualification, belief in a just world (BJW), legal authoritarianism (RLAQ), and locus of control (LOC) on venirepersons' evaluations of aggravating and mitigating circumstances in capital trials. 212 venirepersons from the 12th Judicial Circuit in Bradenton, FL, completed a booklet that contained the following: one question that measured their attitudes toward the death penalty; one question that categorized their death-qualification status; the BJW, LOC, and RLAQ scales; a summary of the guilt and penalty phases of a capital case; a 26-item measure that required participants to evaluate aggravators, nonstatutory mitigators, and statutory mitigators on a 6-point Likert scale; sentence preference; and standard demographic questions. Results indicated that death-qualified venirepersons were more likely to demonstrate higher endorsements of aggravating factors and lower endorsements of both nonstatutory and statutory mitigating factors. Death-qualified participants were also more likely to have a high belief in a just world, espouse legal authoritarian beliefs, and exhibit an internal locus of control. Findings also suggested that venirepersons with a low belief in a just world and an external locus of control demonstrated higher endorsements of statutory mitigators. Participants with legal authoritarian beliefs revealed higher endorsements of aggravators and lower endorsements of nonstatutory mitigators. Legal implications and applications are discussed. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source]