Getting "Just Deserts" or seeing the "Silver Lining"

The relation between judgments of immanent and ultimate justice

Annelie J. Harvey, Mitchell J. Callan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

People can perceive misfortunes as caused by previous bad deeds (immanent justice reasoning) or resulting in ultimate compensation (ultimate justice reasoning). Across two studies, we investigated the relation between these types of justice reasoning and identified the processes (perceptions of deservingness) that underlie them for both others (Study 1) and the self (Study 2). Study 1 demonstrated that observers engaged in more ultimate (vs. immanent) justice reasoning for a "good" victim and greater immanent (vs. ultimate) justice reasoning for a "bad" victim. In Study 2, participants' construals of their bad breaks varied as a function of their self-worth, with greater ultimate (immanent) justice reasoning for participants with higher (lower) self-esteem. Across both studies, perceived deservingness of bad breaks or perceived deservingness of ultimate compensation mediated immanent and ultimate justice reasoning respectively.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere101803
JournalPLoS ONE
Volume9
Issue number7
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 18 Jul 2014

Fingerprint

Social Justice
deserts
self-esteem
Ego
social justice
Compensation and Redress
Self Concept

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)
  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)

Cite this

Getting "Just Deserts" or seeing the "Silver Lining" : The relation between judgments of immanent and ultimate justice. / Harvey, Annelie J.; Callan, Mitchell J.

In: PLoS ONE, Vol. 9, No. 7, e101803, 18.07.2014.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{9f1e8745b76c4bd6a8c57f39fde0da54,
title = "Getting {"}Just Deserts{"} or seeing the {"}Silver Lining{"}: The relation between judgments of immanent and ultimate justice",
abstract = "People can perceive misfortunes as caused by previous bad deeds (immanent justice reasoning) or resulting in ultimate compensation (ultimate justice reasoning). Across two studies, we investigated the relation between these types of justice reasoning and identified the processes (perceptions of deservingness) that underlie them for both others (Study 1) and the self (Study 2). Study 1 demonstrated that observers engaged in more ultimate (vs. immanent) justice reasoning for a {"}good{"} victim and greater immanent (vs. ultimate) justice reasoning for a {"}bad{"} victim. In Study 2, participants' construals of their bad breaks varied as a function of their self-worth, with greater ultimate (immanent) justice reasoning for participants with higher (lower) self-esteem. Across both studies, perceived deservingness of bad breaks or perceived deservingness of ultimate compensation mediated immanent and ultimate justice reasoning respectively.",
author = "Harvey, {Annelie J.} and Callan, {Mitchell J.}",
year = "2014",
month = "7",
day = "18",
doi = "10.1371/journal.pone.0101803",
language = "English",
volume = "9",
journal = "PLoS ONE",
issn = "1932-6203",
publisher = "Public Library of Science (PLOS)",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Getting "Just Deserts" or seeing the "Silver Lining"

T2 - The relation between judgments of immanent and ultimate justice

AU - Harvey, Annelie J.

AU - Callan, Mitchell J.

PY - 2014/7/18

Y1 - 2014/7/18

N2 - People can perceive misfortunes as caused by previous bad deeds (immanent justice reasoning) or resulting in ultimate compensation (ultimate justice reasoning). Across two studies, we investigated the relation between these types of justice reasoning and identified the processes (perceptions of deservingness) that underlie them for both others (Study 1) and the self (Study 2). Study 1 demonstrated that observers engaged in more ultimate (vs. immanent) justice reasoning for a "good" victim and greater immanent (vs. ultimate) justice reasoning for a "bad" victim. In Study 2, participants' construals of their bad breaks varied as a function of their self-worth, with greater ultimate (immanent) justice reasoning for participants with higher (lower) self-esteem. Across both studies, perceived deservingness of bad breaks or perceived deservingness of ultimate compensation mediated immanent and ultimate justice reasoning respectively.

AB - People can perceive misfortunes as caused by previous bad deeds (immanent justice reasoning) or resulting in ultimate compensation (ultimate justice reasoning). Across two studies, we investigated the relation between these types of justice reasoning and identified the processes (perceptions of deservingness) that underlie them for both others (Study 1) and the self (Study 2). Study 1 demonstrated that observers engaged in more ultimate (vs. immanent) justice reasoning for a "good" victim and greater immanent (vs. ultimate) justice reasoning for a "bad" victim. In Study 2, participants' construals of their bad breaks varied as a function of their self-worth, with greater ultimate (immanent) justice reasoning for participants with higher (lower) self-esteem. Across both studies, perceived deservingness of bad breaks or perceived deservingness of ultimate compensation mediated immanent and ultimate justice reasoning respectively.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84904497474&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0101803

U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0101803

DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0101803

M3 - Article

VL - 9

JO - PLoS ONE

JF - PLoS ONE

SN - 1932-6203

IS - 7

M1 - e101803

ER -