This article critically examines two major theoretical perspectives
on justice in social psychology-equity and just world-particularly,
the confusion between believing in justice versus believing that
justice exists, and the neglected moral dimension of justice, the belief
that God or transcendental law creates the universal imperative.
Research on the implications for justice in life events confirms the
hypothesis that justice is perceived when the valences of the person
and the outcomes affecting that person are balanced, that this
proposition holds in comparisons of US. and Indian samples, and
that highly religious persons perceive more justice in life events than
less or nonreligious persons.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adams, J. (1965). Inequity in social exchange In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in social psychology (pp. 267-299). New York: Academic Press.
2.
Bierhoff, H., Cohen, R., & Greenberg, J. (Eds.). (1986). Justice in social relationsNew York: Plenum.
3.
Desai-Carroll, K. (1989). A study of the interrelationships among belief systems Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.
4.
Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice?Journal of Social Issues, 31 , 137-149.
5.
Deutsch, M. (1985). Distributive justice: A social psychological perspectiveNew Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
6.
Foster, G. (1961). Peasant society and the image of the limited goodAmerican Anthropologist, 67, 296-311.
7.
Hong, G.-Y. (1997). Just-world belief and attributions of causal responsibility among Korean adolescentsCross-Cultural Research , 31(2), 119-134.
8.
Kohlberg, L. (1976). Moral stages and moralization: The cognitive development approach In T. Lickona (Ed.), Moral development and behavior: Theory, research, and social issues.New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 31-53.
9.
Lee. Y-T., Pepitone, A., & Albright, L. (1997). Descriptive and prescriptive beliefs about justice: A Sino-U.S. comparisonCross-Cultural Research , 31(2), 99-118.
10.
Lerner, M.J. (1977). The justice motive: Some hypotheses as to its origins and formsJournal of Personality , 45, 1-52.
11.
Lerner, M.J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusionNew York: Plenum.
12.
Lerner, M.J. (1991). Interpreting societal and psychological rules of entitlement In R. Vermunt & H. Steensma (Eds.), Social justice in human relations, (Vol. 1, pp. 13-32). New York: Plenum.
13.
Lerner, M.J., & Simmons, C. (1966). Observers' reaction to the innocent victim: Compassion or rejection?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 4(2), 203-210.
14.
Mikula, G. (Ed.). (1980). Justice and human interaction.New York: Springer-Verlag .
15.
Pepitone, A. (1971). The role of justice in interdependent decision-makingJournal of Experimental Social Psychology , 7, 144-156.
16.
Pepitone, A., & L'Armand, K. (1996). The justice and injustice of life eventsEuropean Journal of Social Psychology , 26, 581-597.
17.
Piaget, J. (1932). The moral judgement of the childLondon: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
18.
Prachi. (1994). Reactions to cases ofjustice and injustice: A study of Hindus, Christians, and Muslims Unpublished master's dissertation, University of Delhi.
19.
Snarey, J. (1985). The cross-cultural universality of development: A critical review of Kohlbergian researchPsychological Bulletin, 97, 202-232.
20.
Steensma, H., & Vermunt, R. (Eds.). (1991). Social justice in human relations (Vol. 2). New York: Plenum.
21.
Tajfel, H. (1978). Differentiation between groupsLondon: Academic Press.
22.
Tucker, R. (1969). The Marxian revolutionary ideaNew York: Norton.
23.
Vermunt, R., & Steensma, H. (Eds.). (1991). Social justice in human relations (Vol. 1). New York: Plenum.
24.
Walster, E., Berscheid, E., & Walster, G. (1973). New directions in equity researchJournal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25, 151-176.
