Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Psychology of Justice

  • Chapter
Handbook of Social Justice Theory and Research

Abstract

The present chapter describes the current state of affairs regarding the psychology of justice. We will give an overview of the most influential psychological theories of (in)justice, describe a representative set of studies and empirical findings from justice research in psychology, and discuss how these theories and findings can be used (a) to better understand justice-related perceptions, cognitions, emotions, and behaviors, and (b) to contribute to peaceful solutions to justice conflicts in our daily lives. This chapter is hierarchically, “vertically” organized. It describes psychological justice research on three different levels. The first, individual level focuses on justice “within” the individual and discusses individual needs, concerns, and motives that may be able to explain whether, why, and under what circumstances people care about justice and when they do not. The second, interpersonal level focuses on justice between individuals and discusses distributive, procedural, interactional, and retributive justice. The third, intergroup level focuses on justice-related conflicts between social groups or social “categories” such as companies, nations, or cultures. In this section, we will discuss what leads people to commit injustices to members of other groups and how group members—even those who were originally uninvolved in the events that originally sparked a conflict—respond to perceived group-based injustices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267–299). New York, NY: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arendt, H. (1963). Eichmann in Jerusalem: A report on the banality of evil. New York, NY: Viking.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ariely, D. (2012). The (honest) truth about dishonesty: How we lie to everyone—especially ourselves. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atran, S., Axelrod, R., & Davis, R. (2007). Sacred barriers to conflict resolution. Science, 317, 1039–1040.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod, R., & Hamilton, W. D. (1981). The evolution of cooperation. Science, 211, 1360–1396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayal, S., & Gino, F. (2012). Honest rationales for dishonest behavior. In M. Mikulincer & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), The social psychology of morality: Exploring the causes of good and evil (pp. 149–166). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Balliet, D., Mulder, L. B., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2011). Reward, punishment, and cooperation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 594–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balliet, D., Parks, C. D., & Joireman, J. (2009). Social value orientation and cooperation: A meta-analysis. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 12, 533–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 193–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (2002). Selective moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Moral Education, 31, 101–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, J. (1995). Blind justice: Fairness to groups and the do-no-harm principle. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 8, 71–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batson, C. D., Ahmad, N., & Lishner, D. (2009). Empathy and altruism. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Oxford handbook of positive psychology (2nd ed., pp. 417–426). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Batson, C. D., Kobrynowicz, D., Dinnerstein, J. L., Kampf, H. C., & Wilson, A. D. (1997). In a very different voice: Unmasking moral hypocrisy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1335–1348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batson, C. D., & Shaw, L. L. (1991). Evidence for altruism: Toward a pluralism of prosocial motives. Psychological Inquiry, 2, 107–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumeister, R. F. (1997). Evil: Inside human violence and cruelty. New York, NY: Henry Holt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumeister, R. F., Bratlavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5, 323–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumert, A., & Schmitt, M. (2016). Justice sensitivity. In C. Sabbagh & M. Schmitt (Eds.), Handbook of social justice theory and research (pp. 161–180). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernhard, H., Fischbacher, U., & Fehr, E. (2006). Parochial altruism in humans. Nature, 442, 912–915.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blader, T. R., & Tyler, T. R. (2009). Testing and extending the group engagement model: Linkages between social identity, procedural justice, economic outcomes, and extrarole behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 445–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bobocel, D. R., Son Hing, L. S., Davey, L. M., Stanley, D. J., & Zanna, M. P. (1998). Justice-based opposition to affirmative action: Is it genuine? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 653–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bodenhausen, G. V., & Wyer, R. S., Jr. (1985). Effects of stereotypes on decision making and information-processing strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 267–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boeckmann, R. J., & Tyler, T. R. (1997). Commonsense justice and inclusion within the moral community: When do people receive procedural protections from others? Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 3, 362–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boehm, C. (2012). Moral origins: The evolution of virtue, altruism, and shame. New York, NY: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolton, G. E., & Ockenfels, A. (2000). ERC: A theory of equity, reciprocity, and competition. The American Economic Review, 90, 166–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brockner, J., DeWitt, R. L., Grover, S., & Reed, T. (1990). When it is especially important to explain why: Affecting the relationship between managers’ explanations of a layoff and survivors’ reactions to the layoff. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26, 389–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brosnan, S. F., & De Waal, F. B. M. (2003). Monkeys reject unequal pay. Nature, 425, 297–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnette, J. L., McCullough, M. E., Van Tongeren, D. R., & Davis, D. E. (2012). Forgiveness results from integrating information about relationship value and exploitation risk. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 345–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsmith, K., & Darley, J. M. (2008). Psychological aspects of retributive justice. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 40, pp. 193–236). San Diego, CA: Elsevier.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsmith, K. M., & Sood, A. M. (2009). The fine line between interrogation and retribution. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 191–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cialdini, R. B., Brown, S. L., Lewis, B. P., Luce, C., & Neuberg, S. L. (1997). Reinterpreting the empathy-altruism relationship: When one into one equals oneness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 481–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, R. L. (2016). Restorative justice. In C. Sabbagh & M. Schmitt (Eds.), Handbook of social justice theory and research (pp. 257–272). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P. E. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, 278–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Correia, I., & Vala, J. (2004). Belief in a just world, subjective well-being and trust of young adults. In C. Dalbert & H. Sallay (Eds.), The justice motive in adolescence and young adulthood: Origins and consequences (pp. 85–100). London, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cropanzano, R., & Ambrose, M. L. (2001). Procedural and distributive justice are more similar than you think: A monistic perspective and a research agenda. In J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organizational justice (pp. 119–151). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crosby, F. J. (1982). Relative deprivation and working women. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crosby, F. J., Iyer, A., & Sincharoen, S. (2006). Understanding affirmative action. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 585–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalbert, C. (2001). The justice motive as a personal resource: Dealing with challenges and critical life events. New York, NY: Kluwer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dalbert, C. (2009). Belief in a just world. In M. R. Leary & R. H. Hoyle (Eds.), Handbook of individual differences in social behavior (pp. 288–297). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darley, J. M., & Pittman, T. S. (2003). The psychology of compensatory and retributive justice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 324–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Cremer, D. (2002). Respect and cooperation in social dilemmas: The importance of feeling included. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1335–1341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Cremer, D., Brebels, L., & Sedikides, C. (2008). Being uncertain about what? Procedural fairness effects as a function of general uncertainty and belongingness uncertainty. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1520–1525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Cremer, D., & Tyler, T. R. (2005). Managing group behaviour: The interplay between fairness, self, and cooperation. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 151–218). New York, NY: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Waal, F. B. M. (1996). Good natured: The origins of right and wrong in humans and other animals. London, UK: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis for distributive justice? Journal of Social Issues, 31, 137–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Effron, D. A., & Monin, B. (2010). Letting people off the hook: When do good deeds excuse transgressions? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1618–1634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellard, J. H., Harvey, A., & Callan, M. J. (2016). The justice motive. In C. Sabbagh & M. Schmitt (Eds.), Handbook of social justice theory and research (pp. 127–143). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellemers, N., Sleebos, E., Stam, D., & De Gilder, D. (2013). Feeling included and valued: How perceived respect affects positive team identity and willingness to invest in the team. British Journal of Management, 24, 21–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellsworth, P. C., & Gross, S. R. (1994). Hardening of the attitudes: Americans’ views on the death penalty. Journal of Social Issues, 50, 19–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fehr, E., & Gächter, S. (2002). Altruistic punishment in humans. Nature, 415, 137–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleurbaey, M. (2008). Fairness, responsibility, and welfare. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R. (1977). Distributive and procedural justice: Combined impact of “voice” and improvement on experienced inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 108–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furnham, A. (2003). Belief in a just world: Research progress over the past decade. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 795–817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ginges, J., Atran, S., Medin, D., & Shikaki, K. (2007). Sacred bounds on rational resolution of violent political conflict. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104, 7357–7360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, M., & Bücklein, K. (2007). Are “we” more punitive than “me”? Self-construal styles, justice-related attitudes, and punitive judgments. Social Justice Research, 20, 457–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, M., & Denzler, M. (2009). What makes revenge so sweet: Seeing the offender suffer or delivering a message? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 840–844.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, M., & Keller, L. (2010). What you did matters only if you are one of us: Offender’s group membership moderates the effect of criminal history on punishment severity. Social Psychology, 41, 20–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, M., Meder, M., & Schmitt, M. (2011). What gives victims satisfaction when they seek revenge? European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 364–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, M., & Rothmund, T. (2009). When the need to trust results in unethical behavior: The Sensitivity to Mean Intentions (SeMI) model. In D. De Cremer (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on ethical behavior and decision making (pp. 135–152). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, M., Rothmund, T., & Süssenbach, P. (2013). The Sensitivity to Mean Intentions (SeMI) model: Basic assumptions, recent findings, and potential avenues for future research. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7, 415–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, M., Schmitt, M., Schalke, R., Maes, J., & Baer, A. (2005). Asymmetrical effects of Justice Sensitivity perspectives on prosocial and antisocial behavior. Social Justice Research, 18, 183–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. (1982). Approaching equity and avoiding inequity in groups and organizations. In J. Greenberg & R. L. Cohen (Eds.), Equity and justice in social behavior (pp. 389–435). New York, NY: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. (1988). Equity and workplace status: A field experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 606–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. (1993). Stealing in the name of justice: Informational and interpersonal moderators of theft reactions to underpayment inequity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54, 81–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gromet, D. M., & Darley, J. M. (2006). Restoration and retribution: How including retributive components affects the acceptability of restorative justice procedures. Social Justice Research, 19, 395–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Güth, W., Schmittberger, R., & Schwarze, B. (1982). An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 3, 367–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hafer, C. L., & Bègue, L. (2005). Experimental research on just world theory: Problems, developments, and future challenges. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 128–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. New York, NY: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haslam, N. (2015). Dehumanization and intergroup relations. In M. Mikulincer & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), APA handbook of personality and social psychology, Vol. 2: Group processes (pp. 295–314). Washington, DC: APA Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heilman, M. E., Block, C. J., & Lucas, J. A. (1992). Presumed incompetent? Stigmatization and affirmative action efforts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 536–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huo, Y. J., Smith, H. J., Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1996). Superordinate identification, subgroup identification, and justice concerns: Is separatism the problem; is assimilation the answer? Psychological Science, 7, 40–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jasso, G., Törnblom, K., & Sabbagh, C. (2016). Distributive justice. In C. Sabbagh & M. Schmitt (Eds.), Handbook of social justice theory and research (pp. 201–218). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, J., Mullen, E., & Murnighan, J. K. (2011). Striving for the moral self: The effects of recalling past moral actions on future moral behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 701–713.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1986). Fairness and the assumption of economics. Journal of Business, 59, s285–s300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karremans, J. C., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2004). Back to caring after being hurt: The role of forgiveness. European Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 207–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karremans, J. C., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2005). Does activating justice help or hurt in promoting forgiveness? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 290–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karremans, J. C., Van Lange, P. A. M., Ouwerkerk, J. W., & Kluwer, E. S. (2003). When forgiving enhances psychological well-being: The role of interpersonal commitment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 1011–1026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, N. L., Hymes, R. W., Anderson, A. B., & Weathers, J. E. (1995). Defendant-juror similarity and mock juror judgments. Law and Human Behavior, 19, 545–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konow, J., & Schwettmann, L. (2016). The economics of justice. In C. Sabbagh & M. Schmitt (Eds.), Handbook of social justice theory and research (p. 106). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laham, S. M. (2009). Expanding the moral circle: Inclusion and exclusion mindsets and the circle of moral regard. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 250–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leliveld, M. C., Van Dijk, E., & Van Beest, I. (2012). Punishing and compensating others at your own expense: The role of empathic concern on reactions to distributive injustice. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 135–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, M. J. (1980). Belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York, NY: Plenum.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, M. J., & Simmons, C. H. (1966). Observer’s reaction to the “innocent victim”: Compassion or rejection? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 203–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory?: New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships. In K. J. Gergen, M. S. Greenberg, & R. H. Willis (Eds.), Social exchange: Advances on theory and research (pp. 27–54). New York, NY: Plenum.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Leyens, J.-P., Paladino, P. M., Rodriguez-Torres, R., Vaes, J., Demoulin, S., Rodriguez-Perez, A., et al. (2000). The emotional side of prejudice: The attribution of secondary emotions to ingroups and outgroups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 186–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liebig S., & Sauer C. (2016). Sociology of justice. In C. Sabbagh & M. Schmitt (Eds.), Handbook of social justice theory and research (pp. 37–59). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liebrand, W. B. G., Jansen, R. W. T. L., Rijken, V. M., & Suhre, C. (1986). Might over morality: The interaction between social values and the interpretation of decision-making in experimental games. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 203–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E. A., Kanfer, R., & Earley, P. C. (1990). Voice, control, and procedural justice: Instrumental and noninstrumental concerns in fairness judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 952–959.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York, NY: Plenum.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lotz, S., Okimoto, T. G., Schlösser, T., & Fetchenhauer, D. (2011). Punitive versus compensatory reactions to injustice: Emotional antecedents to third-party interventions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 477–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCullough, M. E., Fincham, F. D., & Tsang, J.-A. (2003). Forgiveness, forbearance, and time: The temporal unfolding of transgression-related interpersonal motivations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 540–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCullough, M. E., Worthington, E. L., & Rachal, K. C. (1997). Interpersonal forgiving in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 321–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, L., & Sanklecha, P. (2016). Philosophy of justice: Extending liberal justice in space and time. In C. Sabbagh & M. Schmitt (Eds.), Handbook of social justice theory and research (pp. 15–35). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. T., & Ratner, R. K. (1998). The disparity between the actual and assumed power of self-interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 53–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monin, B., & Merritt, A. (2011). Moral hypocrisy, moral inconsistency, and the struggle for moral integrity. In M. Mikulincer & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), The social psychology of morality: Exploring the causes of good and evil (Herzliya series on personality and social psychology, Vol. 3, pp. 167–184). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monin, B., & Miller, D. T. (2001). Moral credentials and the expression of prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 33–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montada, L. (1998). Belief in a just world: A hybrid of justice motive and self-interest? In L. Montada & M. J. Lerner (Eds.), Responses to victimizations and belief in a just World (pp. 217–246). New York, NY: Plenum Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Montada, L. (2002). Justice to the justice motive. In M. Ross & D. T. Miller (Eds.), The justice motive in everyday life. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montada, L., & Maes, J. (2016). Justice and self-interest. In C. Sabbagh & M. Schmitt (Eds.), Handbook of social justice theory and research (pp. 109–125). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montada, L., & Schneider, A. (1989). Justice and emotional reactions to the disadvantaged. Social Justice Research, 3, 313–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okimoto, T. G. (2008). Outcomes as affirmation of membership value: Material compensation as an administrative response to procedural injustice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1270–1282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Opotow, S. (1990). Moral exclusion and injustice: An introduction. Journal of Social Issues, 46, 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinker, S. (2011). The better angels of our nature: Why violence has declined. New York, NY: Viking Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinter, B., Insko, C. A., Wildschut, T., Kirchner, J. L., Montoya, R. M., & Wolf, S. T. (2007). Reduction of interindividual-intergroup discontinuity: The role of leader accountability and proneness to guilt. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 250–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ratner, R. K., & Miller, D. T. (2001). The norm of self-interest and its effects on social action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 5–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed, A., & Aquino, K. (2003). Moral identity and the circle of moral regard towards out-groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 1270–1286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riek, B. M., Mania, E. W., & Gaertner, S. L. (2006). Intergroup threat and outgroup attitudes: a meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 336–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, Z., & Peplau, L. A. (1973). Belief in a just world and reaction to another’s lot: A study of participants in the national draft lottery. Journal of Social Issues, 29, 73–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Runciman, W. G. (1966). Relative deprivation and social justice. London, UK: Routledge Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sachdeva, S., Iliev, R., & Medin, D. L. (2009). Sinning saints and saintly sinners: The paradox of moral self-regulation. Psychological Science, 20, 523–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, M. (1996). Individual differences in sensitivity to befallen injustice. Personality and Individual Differences, 21, 3–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, M. (1998). Methodological strategies in research to validate measures of belief in a just world. In L. Montada & M. J. Lerner (Eds.), Responses to victimization and belief in a just world (pp. 187–215). New York, NY: Plenum Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, M., Baumert, A., Gollwitzer, M., & Maes, J. (2010). The justice sensitivity inventory: Factorial validity, location in the personality facet space, demographic pattern, and normative data. Social Justice Research, 23, 211–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, M., Eid, M., & Maes, J. (2003). Synergistic person × situation interaction in distributive justice behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 141–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, M., Gollwitzer, M., Maes, J., & Arbach, D. (2005). Justice sensitivity: Assessment and location in the personality space. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 21, 202–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, M., Neumann, R., & Montada, L. (1995). Dispositional sensitivity to befallen injustice. Social Justice Research, 8, 385–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, M., & Sabbagh, C. (2004). Synergistic person × situation interaction in distributive justice judgment and allocation behavior. Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 359–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sears, D. O. (1988). Symbolic racism. In P. A. Katz & D. A. Taylor (Eds.), Eliminating racism: Profiles in controversy (pp. 53–84). New York, NY: Plenum Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Shalvi, S., Eldar, O., & Bereby-Meyer, Y. (2012). Honesty requires time (and lack of justifications). Psychological Science, 23, 1264–1270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherif, M., & Sherif, C. W. (1969). Ingroup and intergroup relations: Experimental analysis. In M. Sherif & C. W. Sherif (Eds.), Social psychology (pp. 221–266). New York, NY: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, B., & Stürmer, S. (2003). Respect for group members: Intragroup determinants of collective identification and group-serving behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 183–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skarlicki, D. P., & Folger, R. (1997). Retaliation in the workplace: The roles of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 434–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, H. J., Pettigrew, T. F., Pippin, G. M., & Bialosiewicz, S. (2012). Relative deprivation: A theoretical and meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16, 203–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, H. J., Tyler, T. R., Huo, Y. J., Ortiz, D. J., & Lind, E. A. (1998). The self-relevant implications of the group-value model: Group membership, self-worth, and treatment quality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 470–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (2000). An integrated theory of prejudice. In S. Oskamp (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination: The Claremont symposium on applied social psychology (pp. 23–45). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stouffer, S. A., Suchman, E. A., DeVinney, L. C., Star, S. A., & Williams, R. M. (1949). The American soldier: Adjustment during army life (Vol. 1). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strelan, P., & Van Prooijen, J.-W. (2013). Retribution and forgiveness: The healing effects of punishing for just deserts. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 544–553.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweeney, L. T., & Haney, C. (1992). The influence of race on sentencing: A meta-analytic review of experimental studies. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 10, 179–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H. (1970). Experiments in intergroup discrimination. Scientific American, 223, 96–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talbot, C. F., Price, S. A., & Brosnan, S. F. (2016). Inequity responses in nonhuman animals. In C. Sabbagh & M. Schmitt (Eds.), Handbook of social justice theory and research (pp. 387–403). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tetlock, P. E., Kristel, O. V., Elson, S. B., Green, M. C., & Lerner, J. S. (2000). The psychology of the unthinkable: Taboo trade-offs, forbidden base rates, and heretic counterfactuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 853–870.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Törnblom, K. Y., & Vermunt, R. (2007). Towards an integration of distributive justice, procedural justice, and social resource theories. Social Justice Research, 20, 312–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trivers, R. J. (1971). The evolution of reciprocal altruism. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 46, 35–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsang, J.-A., McCullough, M. E., & Fincham, F. D. (2006). The longitudinal association between forgiveness and relationship closeness and commitment. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 25, 448–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turillo, C. J., Folger, R., Lavelle, J. J., Umphress, E. E., & Gee, J. O. (2002). Is virtue its own reward? Self-sacrificial decisions for the sake of fairness. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89, 839–865.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (1987). Conditions leading to value expressive effects in judgments of procedural justice: A test of four models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 333–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (1994). Psychological models of the justice motive: Antecedents of distributive and procedural justice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 850–863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (2006). Why people obey the law (2nd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2000). Cooperation in groups: Procedural justice, social identity, and behavioral engagement. Philadelphia, PA: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2003). The group engagement model: Procedural justice, social identity, and cooperative behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 349–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., Boeckmann, R. J., Smith, H. J., & Huo, Y. J. (1997). Social justice in a diverse society. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., Lind, E. A., Ohbuchi, K.-I., Sugawara, I., & Huo, Y. J. (1998). Conflict with outsiders: Disputing within and across cultural boundaries. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 137–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Utz, S., Ouwerkerk, J. W., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2004). What is smart in a social dilemma? Differential effects of priming competence on cooperation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 317–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaes, J., Paladino, M. P., Castelli, L., Leyens, J.-P., & Giovannazzi, A. (2003). On the behavioral consequences of infrahumanization: The implicit role of uniquely human emotions in intergroup relations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 1016–1034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bos, K. (2003). On the subjective quality of social justice: The role of affect as information in the psychology of justice judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 482–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bos, K., & Lind, E. A. (2002). Uncertainty management by means of fairness judgments. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 34, pp. 1–60). San Diego, CA: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bos, K., Wilke, H. A. M., & Lind, E. A. (1998). When do we need procedural fairness? The role of trust in authority. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1449–1458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Lange, P. A. M. (1999). The pursuit of joint outcomes and equality in outcomes: An integrative model of social value orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 337–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Lange, P. A. M., Liebrand, W. B. G., & Kuhlman, D. M. (1990). Causal attribution of choice behavior in three N person prisoner’s dilemmas. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26, 34–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Prooijen, J.-W. (2006). Retributive reactions to suspected offenders: The importance of social categorizations and guilt probability. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 715–726.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Prooijen, J.-W. (2009). Procedural justice as autonomy regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1166–1180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Prooijen, J.-W. (2010). Retributive versus compensatory justice: Observers’ preference for punishing in response to criminal offenses. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 72–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Prooijen, J.-W. (2013). Individualistic and social motives for justice judgments. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1299, 60–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Prooijen, J.-W., Ståhl, T., Eek, D., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2012). Injustice for all or just for me? Social value orientation predicts responses to own versus other’s procedures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 1247–1258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Prooijen, J.-W., & Van den Bos, K. (2009). We blame innocent victims more than I do: Self-construal level moderates responses to just world threats. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 1528–1539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Prooijen, J.-W., Van den Bos, K., Lind, E. A., & Wilke, H. A. M. (2006). How do people react to negative procedures? On the moderating role of authority’s biased attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 632–645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Prooijen, J.-W., Van den Bos, K., & Wilke, H. A. M. (2004). Group belongingness and procedural justice: Social inclusion and exclusion by peers affects the psychology of voice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 66–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Prooijen, J.-W., Van den Bos, K., & Wilke, H. A. M. (2005). Procedural justice and intragroup status: Knowing where we stand in a group enhances reactions to procedural justice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 664–676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Vugt, M., Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. B. (2008). Leadership, followership, and evolution. American Psychologist, 63, 182–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 504–535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vermunt, R., & Steensma, H. (2016). Procedural justice. In C. Sabbagh & M. Schmitt (Eds.), Handbook of social justice theory and research (pp. 219–236). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walster, E., Walster, G. W., & Berscheid, E. (1978). Equity: Theory and research. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel, M., & Okimoto, T. G. (2016). Retributive justice. In C. Sabbagh & M. Schmitt (Eds.), Handbook of social justice theory and research (pp. 237–256). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel, M., Okimoto, T. G., Feather, N. T., & Platow, M. J. (2008). Retributive and restorative justice. Law and Human Behavior, 32, 375–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel, M., Okimoto, T. G., Feather, N. T., & Platow, M. J. (2010). Justice through consensus: Shared identity and the preference for a restorative notion of justice. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 909–930.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wildschut, T., Pinter, B., Vevea, J. L., Insko, C. A., & Schopler, J. (2003). Beyond the group mind: A quantitative review of the interindividual-intergroup discontinuity effect. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 698–722.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yovetich, N. A., & Rusbult, C. E. (1994). Accommodative behavior in close relationships: Exploring transformation of motivation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 138–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhong, C. B., Liljenquist, K., & Cain, D. M. (2009). Moral self-regulation: Licensing and compensation. In D. De Cremer (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on ethical behavior and decision making (pp. 75–89). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimbardo, P. (2008). The Lucifer effect: Understanding how good people turn evil. New York, NY: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Philipps University Marburg, Marburg, Germany

    Mario Gollwitzer

  2. VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Jan-Willem van Prooijen

Authors
  1. Mario Gollwitzer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jan-Willem van Prooijen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mario Gollwitzer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Haifa Faculty of Education, Haifa, Israel

    Clara Sabbagh

  2. Department of Psychology, University of Koblenz-Landau, Landau, Germany

    Manfred Schmitt

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gollwitzer, M., van Prooijen, JW. (2016). Psychology of Justice. In: Sabbagh, C., Schmitt, M. (eds) Handbook of Social Justice Theory and Research. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-3216-0_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-3216-0_4

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-3215-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-3216-0

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation