Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Azzi, A. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Azzi, A. E.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 18, No. 6, 736-747 (1992)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167292186010
© 1992 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

Procedural Justice and the Allocation of Power in Intergroup Relations: Studies in the United States and South Africa

Assaad E. Azzi

Yale University

This study explored preferences for the proportionality (PR) versus equality (EQ) principles in the allocation of political power and other resources between majorities and minorities. Preferences for PR were expected when individual-level justice was salient and for EQ when group-level justice was salient. Group-level concerns were expected to be more salient for minorities than majorities for procedural resources and for group-level than individual-level distributive resources. Consistent with expectations, subjects from the United States and South Africa were more likely to divide a procedural resource (political power) equally between two simulated ethnic groups differing in size when led to identify with a minority than a majority. Equality was also more salient to members of real ethnic minorities than members of ethnic majorities. With regard to distributive resources, PR was predominant in the distribution of individual-level material resources and EQ in the distribution of group-level symbolic resources.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Pers Soc Psychol RevHome page
S. Clayton and S. Opotow
Justice and Identity: Changing Perspectives on What Is Fair
Personality and Social Psychology Review, November 1, 2003; 7(4): 298 - 310.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
K. H. Price, J. E. Hunton, T. W. Hail, T. M. Coalter, and B. D. Clinton
Reactions to Majority Voting Procedures and Amelioration of Voting Minority Member Responses
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, February 1, 1998; 24(2): 214 - 223.
[Abstract]