Retributive reactions to suspected offenders: The importance of social categorizations and guilt probability

In the current research, the author investigates the influence of social categorizations on retributive emotions (e.g., anger) and punishment intentions when people evaluate suspected offenders as independent observers. It is argued that information that guilt is certain or uncertain (i.e., guilt probability) has different consequences for retributive reactions to ingroup and outgroup suspects. In correspondence with predictions, results of four experiments showed that people reacted more negatively to ingroup than outgroup suspects when guilt was certain but that people reacted more negatively to outgroup than ingroup suspects when guilt was uncertain. It is concluded that guilt probability moderates the influence of social categorizations on people's retributive reactions to suspected offenders. © 2006 by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc

Retributive justice and social categorizations: The perceived fairness of punishment depends on intergroup status

In the current research, the authors investigate the influence of intergroup status and social categorizations on retributive justice judgments, that is, the extent to which observers perceive punishment as fair. Building on social identity theory and the model of subjective group dynamics, it is predicted that when the ingroup has higher status than the outgroup, people are relatively less concerned about punishment of an outgroup offender than when the ingroup has lower status than the outgroup. Two experiments revealed that participants are more punitive towards an ingroup than an outgroup offender when ingroup status is high but not when ingroup status is low. Furthermore, in correspondence with our line of reasoning, this finding emerged because participants were less punitive towards outgroup offenders when ingroup status is high than when ingroup status was low. It is concluded that the perceived fairness of punishment depends on the offender's social categorization and intergroup status. Copyright ©2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

Confirmatory analysis of exploratively obtained factor structures

Factor structures obtained by exploratory factor analysis (EFA) often turn out to fit poorly in confirmative follow-up studies. In the present study, the authors assessed the extent to which results obtained in EFA studies can be replicated by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) in the same sample. More specifically, the authors used CFA to test three different factor models on several correlation matrices of exploratively obtained factor structures that were reported in the literature. The factor models varied with respect to the role of the smaller factor pattern coefficients. Results showed that confirmatory factor models in which all low EFA pattern coefficients were fixed to zero fitted especially poorly. The authors conclude that it may be justified to use a less constrained model when testing a factor model by allowing some correlation among the factors and some of the lower factor pattern coefficients to differ from zero

We blame innocent victims more than I do: Self-construal level moderates responses to just world threats

This study investigated the impact of self-construal levels on people's tendency to blame innocent victims for the victims' fates. The authors hypothesized that when the belief in a just world is threatened, social self-construal is associated with more victim blaming than individual self-construal is. In Experiments 1 and 2, participants were primed with either the individual self (with the word I) or the social self (with the word we). Results indeed showed that when threats to just-world beliefs were high, social self-activation produced more victim blaming than individual self-activation did. This effect was not found when just-world threats were low. Extending on these findings, Experiment 3 revealed that, following a just-world threat, an independent self-construal measure was negatively related to victim blaming, and an interdependent self-construal measure was positively related to victim blaming. It is concluded that self-construal levels are important to understanding the justice motive. © 2009 by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc

On the psychology of procedural justice: Reactions to procedures of ingroup vs outgroup authorities

Theorizing on procedural justice has assumed that people's reactions to outgroup authorities are to a large extent based on instrumental concerns. Therefore, attention is primarily directed to outcomes rather than procedures in encounters with outgroup authorities. In the current article we propose that in order for people dealing with outgroup authorities to be strongly affected by procedural fairness, the available outcome information should be ambiguous. Furthermore, we argue that people confronted with an outgroup authority react particularly negatively to unfair procedures that give them negative outcome expectancies. These patterns are not expected in encounters with ingroup authorities. Two experiments support our line of reasoning. The discussion focuses on the implications of these findings for the integration of theoretical perspectives on procedural justice. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

Who do we inform? The role of status and target in intergroup whistle-blowing

In two experiments (n = 87 and n = 90), we showed that strongly identifying members of a low status group are more likely to actively inform the ingroup rather than the outgroup about an outgroup transgression, and consider it as more loyal to the ingroup to do so. Moreover, strongly identifying members of a high status group are more likely to actively inform the outgroup rather than the ingroup about an outgroup transgression, and consider this to be more loyal to the ingroup. The results are in support of the notion that, depending on a group's existing status position, negative outgroup information can be used to enhance or confirm the ingroup's standing, affecting whether the ingroup or the outgroup will initially be informed about an outgroup transgression. Copyright © The Author(s), 2009