The present research tested the hypothesis that the political structure of groups moderates the perceived legitimacy of collective punishment. Participants read scenarios of fictitious summer camps in which unidentified members of one group aggressed members of another group. The political structure of both the offender and the victim groups was described as either egalitarian or hierarchical (defined with democratic or non-democratic decision-making procedures). Perceived legitimacy of collective punishment directed against all members of the offender group was assessed by measuring the acceptability of sanctions administered by an authority and of revenge actions inflicted by members of the victim group. Results showed that collective punishment was evaluated as less legitimate when the offender group was egalitarian and the victim group was hierarchical. Supplementary analyses showed that this effect was mediated by the higher value attributed to members of the offender egalitarian group when the victim group was hierarchical.
Allison, S.T., & Messick, D.M. (1987). From individual inputs to group outputs, and back again. Group processes and inferences about members. In C. Hendrick (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology (Vol. 8, pp. 11—143). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
2.
Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173—1182.
3.
Beauvois, J.L. (2005). Les illusions libérales, individualisme et pouvoir social: Petit traité sur des grandes illusions [Liberal illusions, individualism and social power: Little treatise on big illusions]. Grenoble : Presses Universitaires de Grenoble.
4.
Branscombe, N.R. (2004). A social psychological process perspective on collective guilt. In N.R. Branscombe & B. Doosje (Eds.), Collective guilt: International perspectives (pp. 320—334). Cambridge , UK: Cambridge University Press.
5.
Brewer, M.B. (1999). The psychology of prejudice: Ingroup love or outgroup hate. Journal of Social Issues, 55, 429—444.
6.
Carlsmith, K.M., Darley, J.M., & Robinson, P.H. (2002). Why do we punish? Deterrence and just deserts as motives for punishment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 284—299.
7.
Daly, K. (2002). Restorative justice. Punishment and Society, 4, 55—79.
8.
Darley, J.M. (2002). Just punishments: Research on retributional justice . In M. Ross & D.T. Miller (Eds.), The justice motive in everyday life (pp. 314—333). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
9.
Darley, J.M., & Pittman, T.S. (2003). The psychology of compensatory and retributive justice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 324—336.
10.
Doosje, B., Branscombe, N.R., Spears, R., & Manstead, A.S.R. (1998). Guilty by association: When one's group has a negative history. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 872—886.
11.
Doyle, M. (1983). Kant, liberal legacies, and foreign affairs. Philosophy and Public Affairs12, 205—235.
12.
Elster, J. (1990). Norms of revenge. Ethics, 100, 862—885.
13.
Falomir, J.M., Staerklé, C., Depuiset, M.-A., & Butera, F. (2005). Democracy justifies the means: Political group structure moderates the perceived legitimacy of intergroup aggression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1683—1695.
14.
Feather, N. (1999). Judgments of deservingness: Studies in the psychology of justice and deservingness. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 86—107.
15.
Folger, R. (1977). Distributive and procedural justice: Combined impact of `voice' and improvement of experienced inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 108—119.
16.
Green, E., Staerklé, C., & Sears, D.O. (2006). Symbolic racism and Whites' attitudes toward punitive and preventive crime policies. Law and Human Behavior, 30, 435—454.
17.
Hafer, C.L., & Bègue, L. (2005). Experimental research on just-world theory: Problems, developments and future challenges. Psychological Bulletin,131, 128—167.
18.
Hart, H.L.A. (1968). Punishment and responsibility. New York: Oxford University.
19.
Healy, A.F., Hoffman, J.M., Beer, F.A., & Bourne Jr., L.E. (2002). Terrorist and democrats: Individual reactions to international attacks. Political Psychology , 23, 439—467.
20.
Heckathorn, D.D. (1988). Collective sanctions and the creation of prisoner's dilemma norms. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 535—562.
21.
Heckathorn, D.D. (1990). Collective sanctions and compliance norms: A formal theory of group-mediated social control. American Sociological Review, 55, 366—384.
22.
Herman, E.S. (2001). The price is worth it. Anti Imperialist league: Peace and resistance. Retrieved April 29, 2005, from http://www.chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/pol/wtc/hermantheprice.html
23.
Klein, O., & Licata, L. (2003). When group representations serve social change: The speeches of Patrice Lumumba during the decolonization of Congo. British Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 571—594.
24.
Lickel, B., Schmader, T., & Hamilton, D.L. (2003). A case of collective responsibility: Who else was to blame for the Columbine High School shootings?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 194—204.
25.
Lorenzi-Cioldi, F. (1998). Group status and perceptions of homogeneity. European Review of Social Psychology, 9, 31—75.
26.
Marques, J., Abrams, D., & Serodio, R.G. (2001). Being better by being right: Subjective group dynamics and derogation of in-group deviants when generic norms are undermined . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 436—447.
27.
Palmer, A. (1998). Colonial and modern genocide: Explanations and categories. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 21, 89—115.
28.
Petersen, R. (2002). Understanding ethnic violence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
29.
Piaget, J. (1932). The moral judgment of the child. London: Kegan Paul.
30.
Rasinski, K. (1987). What's fair is fair—or is it? Value differences underlying public views about social justice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 201—211.
31.
Reicher, S., & Hopkins, N. (2000). Self and nation. London: Sage.
32.
Sampson, E.E. (1988). The debate on individualism: Indigenous psychologies of the individual and their role in personal and societal functioning. American Psychologist, 43, 15—22.
33.
Sherif, M., Harvey, O.J., White, B.J., Hood, W.R., & Sherif, C.W. (1961). Intergroup conflict and cooperation: The Robber's Cave Experiment. Norman. University of Oklahoma.
34.
Staerklé, C. (2005). L'idéal démocratique perverti: Antagonismes dans les représentations du non-occident. [The perverted ideal of democracy: Antagonism in representations of the non-West.] In M. Sanchez-Mazas & L. Licata (Eds.), L'autre: Regards psychosociaux [The other: Psychosocial views] (pp. 117—148). Grenoble: Presses Universitaires de Grenoble.
35.
Staerklé, C., Clémence, A., & Doise, W. (1998). Representation of human rights across different national contexts: The role of democratic and non-democratic populations and governments. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 207—226.
36.
Staub, E. (1989). The roots of evil: The origins of genocide and other group violence. New York: Cambridge University Press.
37.
Sunshine, J., & Tyler, T. (2003). Moral solidarity, identification with the community, and the importance of procedural justice: The police as prototypical representatives of a group's moral values. Social Psychology Quarterly, 66, 153—165.
38.
Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Tyler, T.R. (1997). The psychology of legitimacy: A relational perspective on voluntary deference to authorities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 323—345.
41.
Tyler, T.R., & Boeckmann, R. (1997). Three strikes and you're out, but why?: The psychology of public support for punishing rule breakers. Law and Society Review, 3, 237—265.
42.
Tyler, T.R., & Lind, E.A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 115—292). San Diego, CA.Academic Press.
43.
Tyler, T.R., & Smith, H.J. (1998). Social justice and social movements. In D.T. Gilbert, S.T. Fiske , & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 595—629). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
44.
Vidmar, N. (2002). Retributive justice: Its social context. In M. Ross & D.T. Miller (Eds.), The justice motive in everyday life (pp. 291—313). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
45.
Vidmar, N., & Miller, D.T. (1980). Social psychological processes underlying attitudes toward legal punishment. Law and Society Review, 14, 565—602.
46.
Wenzel, M. (2002). What is social about justice? Inclusive identity and group values as the basis of the justice motive. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 205—218.
47.
Wenzel, M. (2004). A social categorization approach to distributive justice. European Review of Social Psychology, 15, 219—257.
48.
Yzerbyt, V.Y., Judd, C.M., & Corneille, O. (2004). The psychology of group perception: Perceived variability, entitativity, and essentialism. London: Psychology Press.
