Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
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
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Skitka, L. J.
Right arrow Articles by Mullen, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Skitka, L. J.
Right arrow Articles by Mullen, E.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Understanding Judgments of Fairness in a Real-World Political Context: A Test of the Value Protection Model of Justice Reasoning

Linda J. Skitka

University of Illinois at Chicago, lskitka{at}uic.edu

Elizabeth Mullen

University of Illinois at Chicago

Current theories of justice emphasize social identity reasons for why people care about justice to the relative neglect of personal identity concerns, that is, people’s need to express, defend, and live up to personal moral standards. The authors present a value protection model that predicts that self-expressive moral positions or stands ("moral mandates") are important determinants of how people reason about fairness. Hypotheses were tested and supported in the context of a natural experiment: reactions of a national random sample of adults to the Elián González case pre-raid, post-raid, and then post-resolution of the case. Models that included strength of moral mandates, but not pre-raid judgments of procedural fairness, best predicted reactions to the raid and post-resolution judgments of both procedural and outcome fairness and were associated with expressions of moral outrage and attempts to morally cleanse.

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 28, No. 10, 1419-1429 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/014616702236873
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Science CommunicationHome page
J. C. Besley, K. A. McComas, and C. W. Trumbo
Local Newspaper Coverage of Health Authority Fairness During Cancer Cluster Investigations
Science Communication, June 1, 2008; 29(4): 498 - 521.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol RevHome page
L. J. Skitka
Of Different Minds: An Accessible Identity Model of Justice Reasoning
Personality and Social Psychology Review, November 1, 2003; 7(4): 286 - 297.
[Abstract] [PDF]