The role of religiosity in ultimate and immanent justice reasoning

Annelie J. Harvey, Mitchell J. Callan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

22 Citations (SciVal)


Religious teachings endorse notions of ultimate justice (a misfortune is compensated in the long run) and immanent justice (a misfortune is caused by previous misdeeds). The current research examined whether individual differences in observers' religiosity moderated ultimate and immanent justice reasoning in response to an unfortunate accident that occurred to either a good or bad person. Results showed that participants higher in religiosity perceived greater ultimate justice for the victim regardless of his moral worth. Participants higher in religiosity engaged in greater immanent justice reasoning when the victim was bad, but not when he was good. Perceived deservingness of the accident mediated the effect of the victim's moral worth on immanent justice attributions more strongly among participants higher in religiosity.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)193-196
Number of pages4
JournalPersonality and Individual Differences
Issue number1
Early online date10 Sept 2013
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2014


  • Deservingness
  • Immanent justice
  • Religiosity
  • Ultimate justice

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychology(all)


Dive into the research topics of 'The role of religiosity in ultimate and immanent justice reasoning'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this