The role of the justice motive in economic decision making

Journal of Economic Psychology

Volumn 30, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 172-180

  Dalbert, Claudia ^a   Umlauft, Sören ^a  

^a MARTIN LUTHER UNIVERSITY HALLE WITTENBERG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Dictator game; Economic decision; Implicit processes; Just world belief; Justice motive

Indexed keywords

EID: 62349124029     PISSN: 01674870     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joep.2008.07.006     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Barrett P. Structural equation modelling: Adjudging model fit. Personality and Individual Differences 42 (2007) 815-824
2. Bègue L., and Muller D. Belief in a just world as moderator of hostile attributional bias. British Journal of Social Psychology 45 (2006) 117-126
3. Bentler P.M. On tests and indices for evaluating structural models. Personality and Individual Differences 42 (2007) 825-829
4. Correia, I., & Dalbert, C. (in press). School bullying: Belief in a personal just world of bullies, victims and defenders. European Psychologist.
5. Dalbert C. The world is more just for me than generally: About the personal belief in a just world scale's validity. Social Justice Research 12 (1999) 79-98
6. Dalbert C. The justice motive as a personal resource: Dealing with challenges and critical life events (2001), Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York
7. Dalbert C., Montada L., and Schmitt M. Glaube an eine gerechte Welt als Motiv: Validierungskorrelate zweier Skalen [The belief in a just world as a motive: Validity correlates of two scales]. Psychologische Beiträge 29 (1987) 596-615
8. Dalbert, C., & Umlauft, S. (2003). Justice centrality scale. Accessed 21.1.2007.
9. Damon W. The social world of the child (1977), Ca.: Jossey-Bass, San Francisco
10. Epstein S. Cognitive-experiential self-theory. In: Pervin L.A. (Ed). Handbook of personality. Theory and research (1990), Guilford Press, New York 165-192
11. Fehr E., and Fischbacher U. The nature of human altruism. Nature 425 (2003) 785-791
12. Fetchenhauer D., and Huang X. Justice sensitivity and distributive decisions in experimental games. Personality and Individual Differences 36 (2004) 1015-1029
13. Goffin R.D. Assessing the adequacy of structural equation models: Golden rules and editorial policies. Personality and Individual Differences 42 (2007) 831-839
14. Gollwitzer M., Schmitt M., Schalke R., Maes J., and Baer A. Asymmetrical effects on justice sensitivity perspectives on prosocial and antisocial behavior. Social Justice Research 18 (2005) 183-201
15. Güth W., Schmittenberger R., and Schwarze B. An experimental analysis of ultimate bargaining. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 3 (1982) 367-388
16. Hafer C.L., and Bègue L. Experimental research on just-world theory: Problems, development, and future challenges. Psychological Bulletin 131 (2005) 128-167
17. Hu L., and Bentler P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling 6 (1999) 1-55
18. Kline R.B. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (1998), Guilford Press, New York
19. Konow J. Blind spots: The effects of information and stakes on fairness bias and dispersion. Social Justice Research 18 (2005) 349-390
20. Lerner M.J. The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion (1980), Plenum Press, New York
21. Lerner M.J., and Miller D.T. Just world research and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead. Psychological Bulletin 85 (1978) 1030-1051
22. Lind E.A., and van den Bos K. When fairness works: Toward a general theory of uncertainty management. Research in Organizational Behavior 24 (2002) 181-223
23. Lipkus I.M., Dalbert C., and Siegler I.C. The importance of distinguishing the belief in a Just World for self versus for others: Implications for psychological well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 22 (1996) 666-677
24. McClelland D.C., Koestner R., and Weinberger J. How do self-attributed and implicit motives differ?. Psychological Review 96 (1989) 680-702
25. Messick D.M., Bloom S., Boldizar J.P., and Samuelson C.D. Why are we fairer than others?. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 21 (1985) 480-500
26. Miller D.T. The norm of self-interest. American Psychologist 54 (1999) 1053-1060
27. Montada L. Belief in a just world: A hybrid of justice motive and self-interest?. In: Montada L., and Lerner M.J. (Eds). Responses to victimizations and belief in a just world (1998), Plenum Press, New York 217-246
28. Musch J., Brockhaus R., and Bröder A. Ein Inventar zur Erfassung von zwei Faktoren sozialer Erwünschtheit [An inventory for the assessment of two social desirability factors]. Diagnostica 48 3 (2002) 121-129
29. Otto K., and Dalbert C. Belief in a just world and its functions for young prisoners. Journal of Research in Personality 39 (2005) 559-573
30. Paulhus, D. L. (1994). Balanced inventory of desirable responding: Reference manual for BIDR version 6. Unpublished manuscript, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
31. Schmitt M., Gollwitzer M., Maes J., and Arbach D. Justice sensitivity: Assessment and location in the personality space. European Journal of Psychological Assessment 21 (2005) 202-211
32. Spangler W.D. Validity of questionnaire and TAT measures of need for achievement: Two meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin 112 (1992) 140-154
33. Strack F., and Deutsch R. Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behaviour. Personality and Social Psychology Review 8 (2004) 220-247
34. Sutton R.M., and Winnard E.J. Looking ahead through lenses of justice: The relevance of just-world beliefs to intentions and confidence in the future. British Journal of Social Psychology 46 (2007) 649-666
35. Takezawa M., Gummerum M., and Keller M. A stage for the rational tail of the emotional dog: Roles of moral reasoning in group decision making. Journal of Economic Psychology 27 (2006) 117-139
36. Taylor D.M., Wright G.C., Moghaddam F.M., and Lalonde R.N. The personal/group discrimination discrepancy: Perceiving my group, but not myself, to be a target for discrimination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 16 (1990) 254-262