The existential consequences of an unjust world: The effects of individual differences in belief in a just world and just world threats on death-thought accessibility

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina Roylance ◽  
Andrew Abeyta ◽  
Clay Routledge
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Just World ◽  
Death Thought Accessibility

scholarly journals Just world beliefs, personal success and beliefs in conspiracy theories

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian Furnham
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Composite Measure ◽  
Just World Beliefs ◽  
Just World ◽  
Conspiracy Theories ◽  
The World ◽  
Personal Ideology ◽  
Personal Success

AbstractDo those who believe in conspiracy theories feel less happy and healthy than others? Do they believe the world is simply unjust? This study was concerned with how demographic factors, personal ratings of success, personal ideology (political and religious beliefs) and Just World Beliefs are related to Conspiracy Theories. In total, 406 participants completed two questionnaires: Just World scale (Rubin & Peplau, 1975) and Conspiracy Theories Inventory (Swami et al., 2010) and provided various personal details. The Just World Scale yielded two scores: Just and Unjust beliefs. Participants also reported on their health, happiness and success and a reliable composite measure of well-being was computed. A regression showed younger males, with Unjust World beliefs and politically right-wing views, were more likely to endorse Conspiracy Theories. The discussion revolved around explaining individual differences in accepting these theories. Implications and limitations are discussed.

scholarly journals Less Illusion of a Just World in People with Formally Diagnosed Autism and Higher Autistic Traits

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Bertrams
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Locus Of Control ◽  
Autistic Traits ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Autism Diagnosis ◽  
Just World ◽  
External Locus ◽  
General Belief ◽  
Autistic People

AbstractPeople differ in how strongly they believe that, in general, one gets what (s)he deserves (i.e., individual differences in the general belief in a just world). In this study (N = 588; n = 60 with a formal autism diagnosis), whether or not autistic people and those with high autistic traits have a relatively low general belief in a just world is examined. The results revealed the expected relationship between autism/higher autistic traits and a lower general belief in a just world. In a subsample (n = 388), personal belief in a just world, external locus of control, and self-deception mediated this relationship. These findings are discussed in terms of autistic strengths (less biased information processing) and problems (lowered well-being).

GENDER DIFFERENCES IN PREDICTING DELINQUENT BEHAVIOR: DO INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES MATTER?

2007 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 359-374 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ellen S. Cohn ◽  
Kathryn L. Modecki
Keyword(s):  
Gender Differences ◽  
High School Students ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Delinquent Behavior ◽  
Just World ◽  
Negative Relation ◽  
Direct Model ◽  
Criminal Legal System

The purpose of this study was to determine the role of individual differences (i.e., belief in a just world and authoritarianism), and attitude (i.e., attitudes toward the criminal legal system), in predicting delinquent behavior. High school students (412 males, 423 females) completed questionnaires that measured demographics, belief in a just world (BJW), authoritarianism (RWA), attitudes toward the criminal legal system (ATCLS), and delinquent behavior. Two models were assessed in this study. The first was a direct model, which assessed whether individual differences or attitude best predicted rule-violating behavior. The second was an integrating model, which assessed the role of both factors, individual differences and attitude, as predictors of rule-violating behavior. For male adolescents, the direct model best predicted delinquency, suggesting negative ATCLS was the sole significant predictor of rule-violating behavior. In contrast, for females, the integrating model best predicted delinquency, as negative ATCLS mediated the negative relation between BJW and delinquency, and partially mediated the negative relation between RWA and delinquency. The implications of gender differences in predicting delinquent behavior are discussed.

scholarly journals Neki tipovi valjanosti i pouzdanosti dviju skala vjerovanja u pravedan svijet

2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (15) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vera Ćubela ◽  
Ana Proroković ◽  
Ljiljana Gregov
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Life Satisfaction ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Just World ◽  
Psychometric Characteristics ◽  
Quality Of Life Scale ◽  
Personal Domain ◽  
Life Scale

Almost three decades of research on individual differences in the Belief in a Just World (BJW) provided strong evidence of their relationship with measurements of a number of other constructs such as authoritarianism, religiosity, locus of control, attitudes toward (under)privileged, neuroticism, life satisfaction and other indicators of well-being. This paper presents some psychometric characteristics of the General BJW scale (Dalbert et al., 1987) and the Personal BJW scale (Dalbert, 1993) that were established in their first administration to a group of 206 students at the Faculty of Science and Arts in Zadar. Both scales were found to be reliable, one-factor measures of two relatively separated aspects of the BJW. Consistently with findings at previous studies, the level of endorsement of BJW statements in our study was significantly higher for the Personal than the General BJW scale. The analysis of BJW scales correlations with the ratings of different aspects of life satisfaction, as measured by the Quality of Life scale (Krizmanić and Kolesarić, 1992), supported lite assumption that the BJW (especially in the personal domain) is a significant contributor in explaining the variance of life satisfaction ratings.

Evidence of a Processing Advantage for Deservingness-Relevant Information

2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 127-134
Author(s):  
Carolyn L. Hafer ◽  
Caroline E. Drolet ◽  
Emily E. Davis ◽  
Sidney J. Segalowitz ◽  
Elizabeth P. Shulman
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Reaction Time ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Processing Speed ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Irrelevant Information ◽  
Female Students ◽  
Just World

Abstract. We investigated processing speed for deservingness-relevant versus deservingness-irrelevant information. Female students read stories involving deserved, undeserved, or neutral outcomes. We recorded participants’ reaction time (RT) in processing the outcomes. We also measured individual differences in “belief in a just world” as a proxy for deservingness schematicity. RTs for deserved and undeserved outcomes were faster than for neutral outcomes, B = −8.45, p = .011, an effect that increased the stronger the belief in a just world (e.g., B = −3.18, p = .006). These findings provide novel evidence that the construct of deservingness is central in human social relations, and suggest both universal and particularistic schemas for deservingness.

scholarly journals Too rich to be forgiven? Economic resources shape moral judgment of accidental harm

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Flora Schwartz ◽  
Hakim Djeriouat ◽  
Bastien Trémolière
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Moral Judgment ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Economic Resources ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Economic Factors ◽  
Just World ◽  
Political Preferences ◽  
Socio Economic Factors

When judging a perpetrator who harmed someone accidentally, humans rely on distinct cognitive processes: one that focuses on the victim’s harm, and another one that examines the perpetrator’s intention. The present study investigates how moral judgment of accidental harm is influenced by information about the protagonists’ economic resources. In two preregistered online experiments, participants completed a moral judgment task consisting of short narratives which depicted the interaction between a perpetrator and a victim. We manipulated the victim’s economic resources (rich vs. poor victim) in experiment 1, and both the victim’s and perpetrator’s economic resources in experiment 2. We additionally tested whether participants’ income and socio-political attitudes were associated with individual differences in moral judgment of the perpetrator. We found that economic resources influenced moral judgment and interacted with participants’ income and socio-political preferences when information about both the perpetrator’s and victim’s economic resources was available. Participants were overall harsher toward rich perpetrators and just world views predicted forgiveness of the perpetrator depending on the resource asymmetry between the perpetrator and the victim. These findings extend previous work documenting the effect of socio-economic factors on moral judgment and suggest that third-party moral judgment of accident may be sensitive to the agent’s level of economic resources.

The challenge of accounting for individual differences in folk-economic beliefs

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin C. Ruisch ◽  
Rajen A. Anderson ◽  
David A. Pizarro
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Individual Variation ◽  
Political Ideologies ◽  
Economic Beliefs ◽  
Existing Data

AbstractWe argue that existing data on folk-economic beliefs (FEBs) present challenges to Boyer & Petersen's model. Specifically, the widespread individual variation in endorsement of FEBs casts doubt on the claim that humans are evolutionarily predisposed towards particular economic beliefs. Additionally, the authors' model cannot account for the systematic covariance between certain FEBs, such as those observed in distinct political ideologies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document