for Journals by Title or ISSN
for Articles by Keywords

 A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z  

  Subjects -> SOCIAL SERVICES AND WELFARE (Total: 200 journals)
The end of the list has been reached or no journals were found for your choice.
Journal Cover Social Justice Research
  [SJR: 0.414]   [H-I: 30]   [19 followers]  Follow
   Hybrid Journal Hybrid journal (It can contain Open Access articles)
   ISSN (Print) 1573-6725 - ISSN (Online) 0885-7466
   Published by Springer-Verlag Homepage  [2335 journals]
  • The Impact of Unpunished Hate Crimes: When Derogating the Victim Extends
           into Derogating the Group
    • Abstract: Abstract Just world research has shown that observers derogate victims more for their misfortunes if the perpetrator is not harshly punished (Lerner in J Personal Soc Psychol 1(4):355–360, 1980). However, few studies have investigated minority group derogation as a just world preservation strategy after instances of intergroup harm-doing. This study is among the first to demonstrate the derogation of both individual victims and of the victim’s minority group experimentally, using the context of a racist hate crime in Australia. In the present experiment, participants (N = 110) read a news article describing a hate crime against an Aboriginal Australian teenager and were informed that the perpetrator was harshly or leniently punished (secure vs. justice threat condition). Our results show that in the justice threat condition, participants not only derogated the individual Aboriginal Australian victim more after his death, they also expressed greater racism toward the victim’s group. An indirect effect of the justice threat condition on modern racism via individual victim derogation was observed, along with moderating effects of individual differences in belief in a just world. These findings provide support for the alarming hypothesis that racist hate crimes are not only the manifestation of a racist society, but may also bolster racial prejudices if leniently treated. The results highlight the important role of political and judicial authorities, whose response or non-response to a hate crime can exacerbate or ameliorate existing prejudices.
      PubDate: 2016-05-18
  • Vulnerabilities in China’s Legal System
    • PubDate: 2016-05-09
  • Mr. Winterkorn’s Pay: A Typology of Justification Patterns of Income
    • Abstract: Abstract This article develops a typology of justification patterns of income inequality by means of analysing the discourse surrounding executive pay in Germany. The case of a public debate about the record salary of the car manufacturer VW’s CEO, Martin Winterkorn, in 2012 and 2013, is identified as a rich source for a reconstruction of specific argumentative patterns and their underlying premises. The typology presents five justification patterns, (1) equality of opportunity, (2) desert, (3) procedure of salary determination, (4) harmful consequences of income inequality and (5) need. Further cross-patterns are identified. A key finding is the crucial—but often not explicit—role of factual, definitional or behavioural premises. It is argued that unveiling the structure of justification patterns of income inequality can provide a key tool in scrutinizing as well as in further analysing public debates about income inequality.
      PubDate: 2016-04-23
  • Preference for the Diversity Policy Label Versus the Affirmative Action
           Policy Label
    • Abstract: Abstract Study 1 assessed associations with the labels “diversity policy” (DP) and “affirmative action policy” (AAP) and perceptions of potential policy components. Student and community participants (N = 143) completed a survey assessing associations with one of the policy labels. Both policies evoked similar associations such as “race/minorities” and “equality/equal opportunity,” but the AAP was more often associated with “bias/inequality/discrimination,” “unfairness,” and “racism/prejudice.” When rating potential policy components, reverse discrimination was considered more likely under the AAP. In Study 2 we explored the evaluation of equivalent policy components associated with different policy labels. Student participants (N = 126) rated the policy labeled as the DP more favorably than the AAP. Both studies suggest more favorable attitudes toward the DP label.
      PubDate: 2016-04-18
  • Organizational Justice Across Cultures: A Systematic Review of Four
           Decades of Research and Some Directions for the Future
    • Abstract: Abstract This review aims to provide an overview of the main frameworks and findings of cross-cultural organizational justice research and some directions for future research. We systematically reviewed the literature and analysed 74 papers, which include more than one country, from the justice receiver perspective. We contribute to the literature in two ways. First, our analysis of methodological aspects highlights some limitations: most studies compare two countries, mainly China and the USA; cross-cultural equivalence checks are rare; and most studies do not directly measure culture, rather tend to use collectivism and power distance as post hoc explanations of country differences. Second, we offer a broad view of country differences by investigating contextual effects that go beyond national values. Our analysis of the influence of sociocultural influence levels shows that culture, socioeconomic development, organizational, situational, and individual characteristics interact to predict the development of and reactions to (in)justice across countries. A greater integration of levels is important for the advancement of research. Across cultures, more positive justice perceptions are related to positive outcomes, but are achieved differently, so organizations should be aware of sociocultural influences on employees’ perceptions of justice.
      PubDate: 2016-03-28
  • Examining the Interplay of Justice Perceptions, Motivation, and School
           Achievement among Secondary School Students
    • Abstract: Abstract There is a paucity of empirical research on the social psychology of justice in educational settings. A few previous studies have predominantly focused on distributive and procedural justice concerns, and knowledge about the role of what have been called informational and interpersonal justice for school outcomes is very scarce. In the present study, data from 227 eighth- and ninth-grade students who participated in a survey study were analyzed to examine the interplay between relational justice concerns (decomposed into procedural, interpersonal, and informational justice), motivation to study, and school achievement. A comprehensive theoretically grounded multi-item measure of informational justice was developed and validated. The results showed that informational justice significantly predicts school grades, and that motivation to study fully mediates this effect. Neither procedural nor interpersonal justice was associated with school grades. The implications of these results for research and practice are discussed in detail.
      PubDate: 2016-03-10
  • Unfolding Justice Research in the Realm of Education
    • Abstract: Abstract This introduction to the SJR current special issue on Justice and Education, attempts to further depict the realm of education as a field of justice research. Leaning on Walzer’s (1983) seminal book Spheres of Justice, we first provide a general mapping of education as a “sphere of justice” and then describe and exemplify some of the salient justice paradigms that have guided educational research. Finally, we shortly describe the contributions to the special issue and situate them within the existing research, concluding with some recommendations for future justice research in the realm of education.
      PubDate: 2016-03-05
  • Distributive Justice Antecedents of Race and Gender Disparities in
           First-Year College Performance
    • Abstract: Abstract Public education is a sphere of society in which distributive justice with respect to the allocation of opportunities to learn can have profound and lasting effects on students’ educational outcomes. We frame our study in the distributive justice literature, and define just outcomes specifically from a meritocratic and strict egalitarian perspectives in order to investigate how assignment to academic tracks and the availability of opportunities to learn during high school are associated with students’ academic achievement during college. We examine the role of “just” placement into high school academic tracks, “just” access to high-quality teachers, and “just” assignment of secondary schools’ resources in high school, in relation to college freshmen’s grade point averages (GPA). We utilize longitudinal data from a unique dataset with over 15,000 students who spent their academic careers in North Carolina public secondary schools and then attended North Carolina public universities. Our results suggest that “unjust” assignment of students to certain high schools, access to high-quality teachers, and assignment to learn in specific academic tracks result in long-lasting consequences that are reflected in freshman college GPA. Importantly, findings also show that the direction and magnitude of the relationship between distributional injustice at schools and college performance is moderated by students’ own gender and race. Race and gender interact with the high schools’ institutional contexts operationalized by tracking practices, teacher quality, and by school racial and socioeconomic composition. Results show that similar settings do not affect all students in the same ways.
      PubDate: 2016-03-01
  • The Meaning of Students’ Personal Belief in a Just World for
           Positive and Negative Aspects of School-Specific Well-Being
    • Abstract: Abstract In two cross-sectional questionnaire studies with N = 1792 German and Indian students, aged between 12 and 17 years, we investigated the relation between personal belief in a just world (BJW) and positive as well as negative dimensions of school-specific well-being. Furthermore, we considered students’ personal experience of teacher justice as possible mediator in this relation and controlled for confounding effects of gender, neuroticism, and locus of control. In Study 1, we used multilevel modeling to analyze the German data and to control for class-level effects. In accordance with our hypotheses, Study 1 showed that the more students believed in a personal just world, the better their positive attitudes toward school, their academic self-esteem, and their enjoyment in school were, and the less somatic complaints in school, social problems in school, and worries toward school they experienced. These associations partly differed between classes, but generally persisted when controlled for sex, neuroticism, and locus of control. Finally, the association between personal BJW and well-being was at least partly mediated by students’ personal experience of teacher justice. In Study 2, we focused on the generalizability of the pattern of results across different cultural contexts. However, we did not aim to carry out comparative research. Results from bootstrap mediation analyses were predominantly the same as in Study 1. The adaptive functions of BJW and implications for future school research are discussed.
      PubDate: 2016-03-01
  • The Unfulfillable Promise of Meritocracy: Three Lessons and Their
           Implications for Justice in Education
    • Abstract: Abstract This paper draws on a literature in sociology, psychology and economics that has extensively documented the unfulfilled promise of meritocracy in education. I argue that the lesson learned from this literature is threefold: (1) educational institutions in practice significantly distort the ideal meritocratic process; (2) opportunities for merit are themselves determined by non-meritocratic factors; (3) any definition of merit must favor some groups in society while putting others at a disadvantage. Taken together, these conclusions give reason to understand meritocracy not just as an unfulfilled promise, but as an unfulfillable promise. Having problematized meritocracy as an ideal worth striving for, I argue that the pervasiveness of meritocratic policies in education threatens to crowd out as principles of justice, need and equality. As such, it may pose a barrier rather than a route to equality of opportunity. Furthermore, meritocratic discourse legitimates societal inequalities as justly deserved such as when misfortune is understood as personal failure. The paper concludes by setting a research agenda that asks how citizens come to hold meritocratic beliefs; addresses the persistence of (unintended) meritocratic imperfections in schools; analyzes the construction of a legitimizing discourse in educational policy; and investigates how education selects and labels winners and losers.
      PubDate: 2016-03-01
  • Injustice in School and Students’ Emotions, Well-Being, and
           Behavior: A Longitudinal study
    • Abstract: Abstract School can be regarded as an important factor in the development of children’s values and attitudes. Given this great importance of justice experiences for students’ development, this study aimed at examining the influence of perceived injustice in school on students’ emotions, well-being, and behavior with an experimental longitudinal design. In total, 196 students participated in this study and came to the university with their classes to receive extra teaching once a week for six consecutive weeks. To manipulate justice perceptions, a scenario of arbitrary privilege was chosen to lead students of the experimental group to experience injustice from a beneficiary perspective. We found that students in the experimental group reported higher well-being and a higher appreciation of the opportunity to learn than the control group did. Additionally, they showed an increase in justice-related negative emotions over time; that is, they expressed more of a bad conscience and stronger feelings of anger the more they became aware of their privilege. This study shows that even subtle experiences of injustice in school can have an impact on students’ outcomes. These results are discussed with regard to practical implications.
      PubDate: 2016-03-01
  • Hierarchy-Legitimizing Ideologies Reduce Behavioral Obligations and Blame
           for Implicit Attitudes and Resulting Discrimination
    • Abstract: Abstract Three preregistered studies investigated people’s judgments of whether someone with implicit racial bias is obligated to change their bias and to avoid discrimination based on that bias. Two studies showed that hierarchy-legitimizing ideologies—Belief in a Just World, Social Dominance Orientation, and political conservatism—predict lower obligation judgments. One study showed that hierarchy-legitimizing ideologies predicted greater protection of a potential discriminator; in another, they also predicted lower protection of a person who may be discriminated against. Lastly, one study showed that greater obligation judgments predicted greater blame of a person who discriminated based on implicit bias. Taken together, these four studies address how people’s ideologies relate to their obligation judgments for implicit racial bias and how those obligation judgments are related to blame for discrimination resulting from implicit racial bias.
      PubDate: 2016-02-25
  • Understanding Perceptions of Racism in the Aftermath of Hurricane Katrina:
           The Roles of System and Group Justification
    • Abstract: Abstract The present study examined perceptions of racism in events that occurred during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina among a community sample of New Orleans area residents. Drawing on system justification theory, we examined system justification motives (i.e., meritocracy beliefs) and group justification motives (i.e., group identity) as predictors of perceptions of racism among African Americans and European Americans. Compared to African Americans, European Americans perceived much lower levels of racism in Katrina-related events. Furthermore, meritocracy beliefs were negatively related to perceptions of racism among both African Americans and European Americans. However, private regard (a component of group identity) was positively related to perceptions of racism among African Americans, but negatively related to perceptions of racism among European Americans. The results suggest that both system and group justification motives independently predict perceptions of racism in an important real-world event. Furthermore, system and group justification motives appear to operate in opposition for African Americans, but in tandem for European Americans.
      PubDate: 2016-02-17
  • Different Developmental Pathways from Parental Warmth to
           Adolescents’ Trust in Peers and Politicians: Mediating Roles of
           Adolescent–Parent Attachment and Belief in a Just World
    • Abstract: Abstract The development of trust has its origin in parenting. However, it can be misleading to lump together all types of trust and to suppose that they are formed through similar developmental processes. Therefore, this research examined different developmental pathways of adolescents’ trust in individuals close to them (peers in this study) and those that are distant (politicians in this study). The study used longitudinal data collected from Czech adolescents (N = 904; 50 % of the participants were females). When adolescents were 13 years old, they and their parents reported parental warmth. Adolescents rated their trust in their parents and their beliefs in a just world at age 15 as well as their trust in peers and politicians at age 17. Both maternal and paternal warmth predicted adolescents’ trust in their parents, which in turn led to later trust in peers but not to later trust in politicians. However, maternal and paternal warmth only predicted their trust in politicians through the mediation of their personal belief in a just world. Our findings highlighted that although parents are important in the development of adolescents’ trust, mediating pathways differ depending on the types of relationships involved.
      PubDate: 2016-02-04
  • Thinking, Saying, Doing in the World of Distributive Justice
    • Abstract: Abstract An abiding concern in social science is to achieve consistency in theoretical and empirical accounts of what people think, what they say, and what they do. Strikingly, the study of distributive justice unites within it all three elements—thinking, saying, doing—granting them their own distinctive substantive importance and specifying their relations. This paper examines the ideas and insights of distributive justice, highlighting their special character as thinking, saying, and doing elements. The stage is set for the growth of knowledge, as theoretical analysis provides theoretical clarification and development and empirical analysis provides ever sharper tests of the propositions and predictions of justice theory.
      PubDate: 2015-12-01
  • A New Look at Individual Differences in Perceptions of Unfairness: The
           Theory of Maximally Unfair Allocations in Multiparty Situations
    • Abstract: Abstract Previous research has demonstrated that unfairness judgments of resource allocations become more complex when there are more than two recipients. In order to explain some of this complexity, we propose a set of psychological mechanisms that may underlie four different choices of maximally unfair resource allocations (MUA): Self-Single-Loser, Self-One-Loser-of-Many, Self-Single-Winner, and Self-One-Winner-of-Many. From this psychological theory, several predictions are derived and tested in vignette studies involving a total of 708 participants recruited online using MTurk. As predicted by our theory, (1) choices of MUA where there is a single loser were much more common when the allocated resource was of negative rather than positive valence, and (2) the amount of egoistic bias individuals exhibited when judging the unfairness in receiving a small rather than a large share in a non-extreme multi-party allocation was predicted by their choices of MUA. These findings suggest that an individual’s choice of MUA reveals some generally relevant principles of how unfairness is perceived in multi-party allocations. This opens up new lines of inquiry, especially regarding research on social dilemmas and social value orientation.
      PubDate: 2015-10-29
  • Social Identification Predicts Desires and Expectations for Voice
    • Abstract: Abstract Although a large body of empirical and theoretical work in procedural justice points to the positive consequences of providing voice to people, it remains unclear whether, and to what degree, people may desire voice in the first instance. The current paper presents two studies in which we directly measure people’s relative levels of voice desires and expectations. We hypothesized that any variability in these outcomes would be predicted, at least in part, by people’s relative levels of social identification with salient voice-relevant in-groups. We confirmed this hypothesis in one correlational study with pre-existing groups (Australia and participants’ workplaces) and one study with experimentally created, minimal groups. Results revealed that people do desire and expect voice, but these are neither necessarily extreme nor uniform. Moreover, consistent with our hypothesis, variability in these desires and expectations was associated in a systematic manner with the relative levels of social identification related to a salient in-group that is relevant to the voice context. We consider the implications of these findings with regard to theories of procedural justice, as well as critical directions for future empirical and theoretical work.
      PubDate: 2015-10-05
  • Legitimacy Moderates the Relation Between Perceived and Ideal Economic
    • Abstract: Abstract In this paper we examined the joint effects of perceived economic inequality and legitimacy on ideal economic inequality. We hypothesized that only for those individuals who legitimize inequality, perceived inequality will be positively related to ideal inequality. Conversely, for individuals that do not legitimize inequality, a weaker relation between these variables will be observed. We tested these ideas in two studies. In Study 1, we measured perceived and ideal inequalities (i.e., pay gap) and individual differences in the legitimization of inequality. In Study 2, we measured perceived and ideal inequalities using a novel abacus procedure in which participants had to allocate resources to the different income quintiles, and we then manipulated the legitimacy (vs. illegitimacy) of economic inequality. According to our hypothesis, in both studies we found that when individuals legitimize inequality (vs. when they do not), the relation between perceived and ideal economic inequalities tends to be stronger.
      PubDate: 2015-10-05
  • Tipping the Scales of Justice: The Influence of Victimization on Belief in
           a Just World
    • Abstract: Abstract Previous research has suggested that people have a need to believe in a just world in order to function adaptively, even when negative events occur. However, existing work has not examined how different types of negative events may differentially influence the degree to which people believe the world is just. Drawing data from two waves of a large-scale, nationally representative longitudinal study (Americans’ Changing Lives), we propose that two primary types of injustices—major injustices and threshold injustices—should affect belief in a just world (BJW) differently. Major injustices include traumatic events that are overwhelmingly intense and severe (i.e., experiencing the death of a child); threshold injustices are traumatic events that, while difficult and impactful, are less severe (i.e., being attacked, robbed, or burglarized). We expected that major injustices would be associated with higher BJW, whereas threshold injustices would be associated with lower BJW. Results largely confirmed our hypothesized effects both within the waves of data as well as across waves. Implications for BJW theory and the experience of different types of victimization are discussed.
      PubDate: 2015-09-24
  • Anxiety-Based Personal Values and Perceived Organizational Justice
    • Abstract: Abstract This study examined the influence of personal values on employees’ perceptions of organizational justice. Specifically, we tested whether anxiety-based values explain greater variance in perceived organizational justice compared to anxiety-free values. Employees of a health organization (N = 224) in Norway completed the Organizational Justice Scale and the Portrait Values Questionnaire. Results from multiple regression analysis showed that anxiety-based values (power, achievement, security, conformity, and tradition) explained a significant portion of the variance in employees’ perceptions of organizational justice, whereas anxiety-free values did not (hedonism, stimulation, self-direction, universalism, and benevolence). Power and tradition were the only anxiety-based values that significantly contributed to explain variance in justice perceptions. People with a high score on these values tended to score high on organizational justice. Taken together, the present findings suggest that employees may perceive and interpret organizational processes differently based on their value schema.
      PubDate: 2015-08-30
School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, UK
Tel: +00 44 (0)131 4513762
Fax: +00 44 (0)131 4513327
Home (Search)
Subjects A-Z
Publishers A-Z
Your IP address:
About JournalTOCs
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-2016