The construction and preliminary validation of a global belief in a just world scale and the exploratory analysis of the multidimensional belief in a just world scale

doi:10.1016/0191-8869(91)90081-L

Personality and Individual Differences

Volume 12, Issue 11, 1991, Pages 1171-1178

https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(91)90081-L Get rights and content

Abstract

The goal of the present study was to create and validate a global belief in a just world scale and to assess the psychometric properties of the multidimensional just world scale using subjects in the United States. The desirable psychometric properties of the global belief in a just world scale make it a viable alternative to Rubin and Peplau's (Journal of Social Issues, 31, 65–90, 1975) just world scale. Analysis of the multidimensional just world scale suggests that the scale consists of three factors—interpersonal justice, socio-political justice, and cynicism/fatalism—and has poor psychometric properties. Both the global and multidimensional belief in a just world scale correlate positively with trust and internal locus of control.

References (17)

A.L. Ambrosio et al.
Factor analysis of the just world scale
The Journal of Social Psychology
(1990)
A.L. Ambrosio et al.
Factor analysis of the belief in just world scale
H.C. Fink et al.
Belief in a just world, interpersonal trust and attitudes
Paper presented at the Eastern Psychological Association
(1976)
A. Furnham et al.
The multi-dimensional just world belief scale
(1988)
A. Furnham et al.
Just World beliefs and AIDS: A validational study of the new multidimensional just world belief scale
(1988)
A. Furnham et al.
Belief in a just world: Review and critique of the Individual difference literature
British Journal of Social Psychology
(1989)
M.E. Hyland et al.
Exploratory factor analysis of the just world scale using British undergraduates
British Journal of Social Psychology
(1987)
R.M. Kaplan
Components of trust: Note on the use of Rotter's Scale
Psychological Reports
(1973)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (329)

Victims of misfortune may not “deserve” help: A possible factor in victim-devaluation
2024, Evolution and Human Behavior
Why do people blame, devalue or derogate the victims of misfortune? The literature suggests general factors like a belief in a just world or a desire to distance oneself from misfortune, but the empirical results are often unclear. Here we suggest another potential factor in victim-devaluation in particular. Attitudes to victims should be seen in the context of human cooperation, as victims can be a source of costs for others and, therefore, may constitute poor potential cooperation partners. If that is the case, devaluation should be associated with a reluctance to offer help to victims. As predicted, across six pre-registered studies, we found that participants' reluctance to donate their own money (their bonus for participation), or allocate other people's money to a victim predicted the devaluation of the victim's character. Both devaluation and willingness to help were influenced by manipulating the victim's apparent competence, and the victim's concern for other people's possible costs, two crucial dimensions of cooperative potential. These results are consistent with the overall hypothesis that people's intuitions about a victim's cooperation potential are relevant to victim-devaluation.
When does anthropomorphism hurt? How tool anthropomorphism negatively affects consumers' rewards for tool users
2024, Journal of Business Research
The current work explores how tool anthropomorphism adversely affects people’s rewards for tool users. This effect arises because tool anthropomorphism decreases perceived effort of tool users as people see tool users to be exerting less effort with some of the effort picked up by the anthropomorphized tools. Study 1 adopts a context of a national city-cleaning activity to verify the main effect in the form of prosocial behaviors. Study 2 replicates the main effect in a consumption context for monetary reward (i.e., tips). Study 3 reveals the underlying mechanism of perceived effort and rules out the alternative explanation of perspective-taking. Study 4 verifies the mediating role of perceived effort by manipulating tool users’ effort as explicitly mentioned (or not). Finally, Study 5 shows the moderating role of just world belief. Our findings are robust across various contexts and provide novel theoretical and practical implications.
Whose story is this? Source reveal as a communication tactic to increase consumers’ advocacy for social causes
2024, Journal of Business Research
Episodes of discrimination and marketplace injustice go viral frequently. Sometimes, people hear these stories from someone who was not the actual victim featured in the story. The current work examines how exposure to a story told by one person, that is subsequently revealed to have happened to another person, influences the audience’s persuasion-related responses. Across three studies conducted in the context of race and injustice in the marketplace (plus two in the web appendix), we demonstrate that the group membership (from a dominant vs. vulnerable group) of both the storyteller and the victim interact to influence an audience’s willingness to advocate for social causes. Examination of the process demonstrates that judgments of victim trustworthiness and perceived moral violation underlie the effects. In further support of process, the effect of victim race is attenuated when it is revealed at the beginning (vs. the end) of the message. The current work contributes to research on source effects, narrative persuasion, and advocacy-related word of mouth.
Just-word beliefs and community-level abortion stigma: An exploratory survey
2023, Contraception
This study aimed to evaluate whether belief in a just world is associated with community-level abortion stigma.
From December 2020 to June 2021, we conducted a national U.S. survey of 911 adults using Amazon Mechanical Turk. Survey respondents completed both the Community-Level Abortion Stigma Scale and Global Belief in a Just World Scale. We used linear regression to evaluate the association between just-world beliefs, demographic characteristics, and community-level abortion stigma.
The mean Global Belief in a Just World Scale score was 25.8. The mean Community-Level Abortion Stigma Scale score was 2.6. The strength of just-world beliefs (β = 0.7), male gender (β = 4.1), a history of a previous pregnancy (β = 3.1), post college education (β = 2.8), and strength of religious beliefs (β = 0.3) were associated with higher community-level abortion stigma. Asian race was associated with lower community-level abortion stigma (β = −7.2).
After controlling for demographic characteristics, strong just-world beliefs were associated with higher community-level abortion stigma.
Understanding just-world beliefs may provide a potential target for stigma-reduction strategies.
Social Worldviews Predict the General Factor of Paranormal and Generic Conspiracist Beliefs
2023, Spanish Journal of Psychology
Do Just Trainer Behaviors Matter?: An Investigation of Felt Obligation, Affect, and Endorsement of the Just World Hypothesis
2024, Journal of Personnel Psychology

View all citing articles on Scopus

View full text

The construction and preliminary validation of a global belief in a just world scale and the exploratory analysis of the multidimensional belief in a just world scale

Abstract

Factor analysis of the just world scale

The Journal of Social Psychology

Factor analysis of the belief in just world scale

Belief in a just world, interpersonal trust and attitudes

Paper presented at the Eastern Psychological Association

The multi-dimensional just world belief scale

Just World beliefs and AIDS: A validational study of the new multidimensional just world belief scale

Belief in a just world: Review and critique of the Individual difference literature

British Journal of Social Psychology

Exploratory factor analysis of the just world scale using British undergraduates

British Journal of Social Psychology

Components of trust: Note on the use of Rotter's Scale

Psychological Reports