An accessible identity nodel (AIM) of justice reasoning is introduced to explain when people become concerned about justice and how they define what is fair or unfair once justice concerns are activated. This model has two core propositions: (a) People are most likely to think about justice and fairness when self-relevant values and goals are highly accessible or activated, and (b) how people define fairness depends on which aspect of the self (i.e., material, social, or personal and moral) dominates the working self-concept. A review of the literature indicates that this general model provides an integrative account for when and how people become concerned about both procedural and distributive justice, and provides a cogent explanationfor known effects and results previously thought to be anomalies. Finally, the model generates novel hypotheses about how identity threat may lead to motivated perceptions off airness or unfairness.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequality in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology Vol. 2 (pp. 267-299). New York: Academic.
2.
Aronson, J., Blanton, H., & Cooper, J. (1995). From dissonance to disidentification: Selectivity in the self-affirmation process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 986-996.
3.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive view. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
4.
Batson, C. D., Thompson, E. R., Seuferling, G., Whitney, H., & Strongman, J. A. (1999). Moral hypocrisy: Appearing moral to oneself without being so. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 525-537.
5.
Baumeister, R. (1999). The nature and structure of the self: An overview. In R. Baumeister (Ed.), The self in social psychology (pp. 1-20). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
6.
Beaman, A. L., Klentz, B., Diener, E., & Svanum, S. (1979). Self-awareness and transgression in children: Two field studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1835-1846.
7.
Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 139-168.
8.
Berkowitz, L., & Walster, E. (1976.) Equity theory: Toward a general theory of social interaction. Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 9). New York: Academic Press.
9.
Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. S. (1987). Interactional justice. In R. J. Lewicki, B. M. Sheppard, & M. H. Bazerman (Eds.), Research on negotiations in organizations (Vol. 1, pp. 43-55). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
10.
Bobocel, R., & Holmvall, C. (2002, June). Self-construals and the fair process effect. Paper presented at the International Society of Justice Research, Skövde, Sweden.
11.
Bobocel, R., Son Hing, L. S., Davey, L. M., Stanley, D. J., & Zanna, M. P. (1998). Justice-based opposition to social policies: Is it genuine?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 653-669.
12.
Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 475-482.
13.
Brockner, J., Chen, Y., Mannix, E. A., Leung, K., & Skarlicki, D. P. (2000). Culture and procedural fairness: When the effects of what you do depend on how you do it. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 138-159.
14.
Brockner, J., Heuer, L., Magner, N., Folger, R., Umphress, E., van den Bos, K., et al. (2003). High proceedural fairness heightens the effect of outcome favorability on self-evaluations: An attributional analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 91, 51-68.
15.
Brockner, J., Tyler, T. R., & Cooper-Schneider, R. (1992). The influence of prior commitment to an institution on reactions to perceived unfairness: The higher they are, the harder they fall. Administrative Quarterly, 37, 241-261.
16.
Brockner, J., & Wiesenfeld, B. M. (1996). An interactive framework for explaining reactions to decisions: Interactive effects of outcomes and procedures. Psychological Bulletin, 120, 189-208.
17.
Bugental, J. F. T., & Zelen, S. L. (1950). Investigations into the ‘self-concept’. I. The W-A-Y technique. Journal of Personality, 18, 483-498.
18.
Campbell, K. W., & Sedikides, C. (1999). Self-threat magnifies the self-serving bias: A meta-analytic integration. Review of General Psychology, 3, 23-43.
19.
Carver. C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1998). On the self-regulation of behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press.
20.
Chen, Y., Brockner, J., & Greenberg, J. (2002). When is it a ‘pleasure to do business with you’? The effects of status, outcome favorability, and procedural fairness. Paper under review.
21.
Clayton, S., & Opotow, S. (2003). Justice and identity: Changing perspectives on what is fair. Personalitv and Social Pssvchology Review; 7, 298-310.
22.
Crosby, F. J. (1982). Relative deprivation and the workiong woman. New York: Oxford University Press.
23.
Crosby, F. J., & Ropp, S. A. (2002). Awakening to discrimination. In M. Ross & D. T. Miller (Eds.), The justice motive in everyday life (pp. 382-396). New York: Cambridge University Press.
24.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19, 109-134.
25.
Deutsch, M. (1985). Distributive justice. Binghamton, NY: Vail-Ballou Press.
26.
Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness, and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist, 55, 34-43.
27.
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.
28.
Drake, D. G., & Lawrence, J. A. (2000). Equality and distributions of inheritance in families. Social Justice Research, 13, 271-290.
29.
Ellemers, N., Spears, R., & Doosje, R. (1997). Sticking together or falling apart: In-group identification as a psychological determinant of group commitment versus individual mobility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 617-626.
30.
Emmons, R. A. (1986). Personal strivings: An approach to personality and subjective well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1058-1068.
31.
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.
32.
Finjeman, Y. A., Willemsen, M. E., & Poortinga, Y. H. (1996). Individualism - collectivism: An empirical study of a conceptual issue. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27, 381-402.
33.
Fiske, A. P. (1991). Structures of social life. New York: Free Press.
34.
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.
35.
Folger, R. (2001). Fairness as deonance. In S. W. Gilliland, D. D. Steiner, & D. P. Skarlicki (Eds.), Research in social issues in management (Vol. 1, pp. 3-33). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishers.
36.
Forgas, J. P. (1992). Affect in social judgments and decisions: A multiprocess model. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 227-275). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
37.
Freeberg, A. L., & Stein, C. H. (1996). Felt obligation towards parents in Mexican-American and Anglo-American young adults. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 14, 457-471.
38.
Greenberg, J. (1980). Attentional focus and locus of performance causality as determinants of equity behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 579-585.
39.
Greenberg, J. (1983a). Overcoming egocentric bias in perceived fairness through self-awareness. Social Psychology Quarterly, 46, 152-156.
40.
Greenberg, J. (1983b). Self-image versus impression management in adherence to distributive justice standards: The influence of self-awareness and self-consciousness. Journal of Personalits and Social Psychology, 44, 5-19.
41.
Greenberg, J., & Folger, R. (1983). Procedural justice, participation, and the fair process effect in groups and organizations. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), Basic group processes (pp. 235-256). New York: Springer-Verlag.
42.
Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108,814-834.
43.
Hegtvedt, K. A. (1987). When rewards are scarce: Equal or equitable distributions?Social Forces, 66, 183-207.
44.
Hegtvedt, K. A. (1988). Social determinants of perception: Power, equity, and status effects in an exchange situation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 51, 141-153.
45.
Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Reviews; 94, 319-340.
46.
Huo, Y. J., Smith, H. J., Tyler. T. R.. & Lind. E. (1996) Superordinate identification, subgroup identification, and justice concerns: Is separatism the problem; is assimilation the answer?Psychological Science, 7, 40-45.
47.
James, W. (1890). The principles of psychologv. New York: Holt.
48.
Jones, E. E., Rhodewalt, F., Berglas, S. C., & Skelton, A. (1981). Effects of strategic self-preservation on subsequent self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 407-421.
49.
Kernis, M. H., & Reis, H. T. (1984). Self-consciousness, self-awareness, and justice in reward allocation. Journal of Personality, 52, 58-70.
50.
Kessler, T., Mummendey, A., & Leisse, U. K. (2000). The personal-group discrepancy: Is there a common information basis for personal and group judgment?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 95-109.
51.
Knez, M. J., & Camerer, C. F. (1995). Outside options and social comparison in three-player ultimatum game experiments. Games and Economic Behavior, 10, 65-94.
52.
Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press.
53.
Leary, M. R., Tambor, E. S., Terdal, S. K., & Downs, D. L. (1995). Self-esteem as an interpersonal monitor: The sociometer hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 518-530.
54.
Lee, Y. T., & Ottati, V. (1995). Perceived in-group homogeneity as a function of group membership salience and stereotype threat. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 610-619.
55.
Lerner, M. J. (2002). Reflections on a life of studying justice. Plenary address presented at the IXth International Social Justice Conference, Skövde, Sweden.
56.
Leventhal, G. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? New approaches to fairness in social relationships. In K. Gergen, M. Greenberg, & R. Willis (Eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research (pp. 27-55). New York: Plenum.
57.
Lind, E. A. (2002). Fairness judgments as cognitions. In M. Ross & D. T. Miller (Eds.), The justice motive in everyday life (pp. 416-431). New York: Cambridge University Press.
58.
Major, B., & Adams, J. B. (1983). Role of gender, interpersonal orientation, and self-presentation in distributive-justice behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 598-608.
59.
Markovsky, B. (1988). Injustice and arousal. Social Justice Research, 2, 223-233.
60.
Markus, H. (1977). Self-schemata and processing information about the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 63-78.
61.
Markus, H., & Kunda, Z. (1986). Stability and malleability of the self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 858-866.
62.
McGuire, W. J., McGuire, C. V., & Cheever, J. (1986). The self in society: Effects of social contexts on the sense of self. British Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 259-270.
63.
Mussweiler. T., Gabriel, S., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2000). Shifting social identities as a strategy for deflecting threatening social comparisons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 398-409.
64.
Peeters, G. H., & Czapinski, J. (1990). Positive-negative asymmetry: On cognitive consistency and positivity bias. European Review of Social Psychology, 1, 33-60.
65.
Peters, S., Ybema, J. F., & Bobocel, R. (2002, June). Ethical considerations and egoism-based pleasure: Reactions to advantageous inequity under cognitive busy conditions. Paper presented at the meeting of the International Society of Justice Research, Skövde, Sweden.
66.
Platow, M. J., & van Knippenberg, D. A. (2001). A social identity analysis of leadership endorsement: The effects of leader in-group prototypicality and distributive intergroup fairness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1508-1519.
67.
Prentice, D. A., & Crosby, F. (1987). The importance of context for assessing deservingness. In J. C. Masters & W. P. Smith (Eds.). Social comparison, social justice, and relative deprivation: Theoretical, empirical, and policy perspectives (pp. 165-182). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
68.
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.
69.
Reis, H. T., & Burns, L. B. (1982). The salience of the self in responses to inequity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18, 464-475
70.
Rentsch, J. R., & Heffner, T. S. (1994). Assessing self-concept: Analysis of Gordon's coding scheme using “Who Am I?” responses. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 9, 283-300.
71.
Rest, J., Narvaez, D., Bebeau, M. J., & Thoma, S. J. (1999). A neo-Kolhbergian approach: The DIT and schema theory. Educational Psychology Review, 11, 291-324.
72.
Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press.
73.
Schafer, R. B. (1988). Equity/inequity and self-esteem: A reassessment. Psychological Reports, 63, 637-638.
74.
Schlenker, B. R., Dlugolecki, D. W., & Doherty, K. (1994). The impact of self-presentations on self-appraisals and behavior: The roles of commitment and biased scanning. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 20-33.
75.
Showers, C. J. (2002). Integration and compartmentalization: A model of self-structure and self-change. In D. Cervone & W. Mischel (Eds.), Advances in personality science. (pp. 271-291). New York: Guilford Press.
76.
Sedikides, C., & Gaertner, L. (2001). The social self: The quest for identity and the motivational primacy of the individual self. In J. P. Forgas, K. D. Williams, & L. Wheeler (Eds.) The social mind: Cognitive and motivational aspects of interpersonal behavior (pp. 115-138). New York: Cambridge University Press.
77.
Simon, L., Greenberg, J., & Brehm, J. (1995). Trivialization: The forgotten mode of dissonance reduction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 247-260.
78.
Skitka, L. J. (2002). Do the means justify the ends, or do the ends justify the means? A value protection model of justice reasoning. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 452-461.
79.
Skitka, L. J., & Houston, D. (2001). When due process is of no consequence: Moral mandates and presumed defendant guilt or innocence. Social Justice Research, 14, 305-326.
80.
Skitka, L. J., & Mullen, E. (2002). Understanding judgments of fairness in a real-world political context: A test of the value protection model of justice reasoning. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1419-1429.
81.
Smith, H. J., Spears, R., & Hamstra, I. J. (1999). Social identity and the context of relative deprivation. In N. Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doosje (Eds.), Social identity (pp. 205-229). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
82.
Smith, H. J., Spears, R. & Oyen, M. (1994). The influence of personal deprivation and salience of group membership on justice evaluations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 277-299.
83.
Spears, R., Doojse, B., & Ellemers, N. (1999). Commitment and the context of social perception (pp. 59-83). In N. Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doosje (Eds.) Social identity, Malden, MA: Blackwell.
84.
Steele. C. (1988). The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustaining the integrity of the self. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 21, pp. 261-302). New York: Academic Press.
85.
Steele, C. M. (1999). The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustaining the integrity of the self. In R. F. Baumeister (Ed), The self in social psychology. Key readings in social psychology (pp. 372-390). Philadelphia: Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis.
86.
Stone, J., Wiegand, A. W., Cooper, J., & Aronson, E. (1997). When exemplification fails: Hypocrisy and the motive for self integrity. Journal of Personal and Social Psychology, 72, 54-65.
87.
Swann, W. B., Jr., & Read, S. J. (1981). Acquiring self-knowledge: The search for feedback that fits. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 1119-1128.
88.
Synder, M., & Swann, W. B. (1978). Behavioral confirmation in social interaction: From social perception to social reality. Journial of Experimental Social Psychology, 14, 148-162.
89.
Tesser, A., & Cornell, D. P. (1991). On the confluence of self-processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27, 501-526.
90.
Tetlock, P. E. (2002). Social functionalist frameworks for judgment and choice: Intuitive politicians, theologians, and prosecutors. Psychological Review, 109, 451-471.
91.
Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
92.
Tice, D. M. (1992). Self-presentation and self-concept change: The looking glass self as magnifying glass. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 435-451.
93.
Turner, J. C. (1985). Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in group processes: Theory and research (Vol. 2, pp. 77-122). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
94.
Turner, J. C. (1999). Some current issues in research on social identity and self-categorization theories. In N. Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doosje (Eds.) Social identity (pp. 6-34). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
95.
Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 595-629). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
96.
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., pp. 595-642), Boston: McGraw-Hill.
97.
Vallacher, R. R., Nowak, A., Froehlich, M., & Rockloff, M. (2002). The dynamics of self-evaluation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 370-379.
98.
Vallacher, R. R., & Solodky, M. (1979). Objective self-awareness, standards of evaluation, and moral behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 15, 254-262.
99.
van den Bos, K., Lind, E. A., Vermunt, R., & Wilke, H. A. M. (1997). How do I judge my outcome when I do not know the outcome of others? The psychology of the fair process effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1034-1046.
100.
van Prooijen, J. W., van den Bos, K., & Wilke, H. A. M. (2002). Procedural justice and status: Status salience as antecedent of procedural fairness effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1353-1361.
101.
Walster, E. G., Walster, W., & Berscheid, E. (1978). Equity: Theory and research. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
102.
Watts, B. L., Messé, L. A., & Vallacher, R. R. (1982). Toward understanding sex differences in pay allocation: Agency, communion, and reward distribution behavior. Sex Roles, 8, 1175-1187.
103.
Wegner, D. M., & Vallacher, R. R. (1986). Action identification. In R. M. Sorrentio & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundation of social behavior (Vol. 1, pp. 550-582). New York: Guilford Press.
104.
Weiner, B. (1985). “Spontaneous” causal thinking. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 74-84.
105.
Wenzel, M. (2000). Justice and identity: The significance of inclusion for perceptions of entitlement and the justice motive. Personalitv and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 157-176.
106.
Wenzel, M. (2001). A social categorization approach to distributive justice: Social identity as the link between relevance of inputs and need for justice. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 315-335.
107.
Wiesenfeld, B. M., Brockner, J., & Martin, C. (1999). A self-affirmation analysis of survivors' reactions to unfair organizational downsizings. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 441-460.
