The role of anger in mediating the effects of procedural justice and injustice

IF 4 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Group Processes & Intergroup Relations Pub Date : 2023-05-26 DOI:10.1177/13684302221115640
E. Maguire, Belén Lowrey-Kinberg, Devon Johnson
{"title":"The role of anger in mediating the effects of procedural justice and injustice","authors":"E. Maguire, Belén Lowrey-Kinberg, Devon Johnson","doi":"10.1177/13684302221115640","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Research has found that people’s perceptions of the extent to which authority figures behave in a procedurally just (or unjust) manner have powerful effects on a variety of outcomes. Procedural justice has been shown to influence people’s sense of obligation to obey and willingness to cooperate with the law and its agents, as well as people’s willingness to comply with the law and legal authorities. Yet very little research has examined the causal mechanisms through which the perceived fairness of procedures influences these outcomes. One possibility is that procedural injustice may trigger affective responses such as anger, frustration, or fear. In this study, we test the effects of three procedural justice conditions on a variety of outcomes using a laboratory-style experiment that simulates a police traffic stop. At the same time, we test the extent to which the relationships between procedural justice and these outcomes are mediated by people’s self-reported levels of anger. Our findings reveal that the treatment conditions had strong effects on self-reported anger, with the procedural justice condition decreasing anger, and the procedural injustice condition increasing anger. Moreover, the findings reveal that the treatment conditions also exerted indirect effects on all outcomes through anger. Taken together, these findings reinforce the importance of emotion in mediating the effects of procedural justice on a variety of outcomes during intergroup encounters.","PeriodicalId":48099,"journal":{"name":"Group Processes & Intergroup Relations","volume":"26 1","pages":"796 - 815"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Group Processes & Intergroup Relations","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302221115640","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Research has found that people’s perceptions of the extent to which authority figures behave in a procedurally just (or unjust) manner have powerful effects on a variety of outcomes. Procedural justice has been shown to influence people’s sense of obligation to obey and willingness to cooperate with the law and its agents, as well as people’s willingness to comply with the law and legal authorities. Yet very little research has examined the causal mechanisms through which the perceived fairness of procedures influences these outcomes. One possibility is that procedural injustice may trigger affective responses such as anger, frustration, or fear. In this study, we test the effects of three procedural justice conditions on a variety of outcomes using a laboratory-style experiment that simulates a police traffic stop. At the same time, we test the extent to which the relationships between procedural justice and these outcomes are mediated by people’s self-reported levels of anger. Our findings reveal that the treatment conditions had strong effects on self-reported anger, with the procedural justice condition decreasing anger, and the procedural injustice condition increasing anger. Moreover, the findings reveal that the treatment conditions also exerted indirect effects on all outcomes through anger. Taken together, these findings reinforce the importance of emotion in mediating the effects of procedural justice on a variety of outcomes during intergroup encounters.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
愤怒在调解程序公正和程序不公正影响中的作用
研究发现,人们对权威人物在程序上的公正(或不公正)程度的看法对各种结果都有很大的影响。程序正义已被证明会影响人们对法律及其代理人的服从义务感和合作意愿,以及人们对法律和法律权威的遵守意愿。然而,很少有研究考察了感知到的程序公平性如何影响这些结果的因果机制。一种可能性是程序上的不公正可能引发情感反应,如愤怒、沮丧或恐惧。在本研究中,我们使用模拟警察交通拦截的实验室式实验来测试三种程序正义条件对各种结果的影响。同时,我们测试了程序公正和这些结果之间的关系在多大程度上是由人们自我报告的愤怒水平介导的。结果表明,治疗条件对自我报告的愤怒情绪有较强的影响,程序公正条件降低愤怒情绪,程序不公正条件增加愤怒情绪。此外,研究结果表明,治疗条件也通过愤怒对所有结果产生间接影响。综上所述,这些发现强化了情绪在调解程序公正对群体间遭遇的各种结果的影响中的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
4.50%
发文量
76
期刊介绍: Group Processes & Intergroup Relations is a scientific social psychology journal dedicated to research on social psychological processes within and between groups. It provides a forum for and is aimed at researchers and students in social psychology and related disciples (e.g., organizational and management sciences, political science, sociology, language and communication, cross cultural psychology, international relations) that have a scientific interest in the social psychology of human groups. The journal has an extensive editorial team that includes many if not most of the leading scholars in social psychology of group processes and intergroup relations from around the world.
期刊最新文献
Judgments toward displays of national (dis)loyalty in members of nations other than one’s own: Universalistic and parochial perspectives Two Paths to Violence: Individual versus Group Emotions during Conflict Escalation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories “Ins and outs”: Ethnic identity, the need to belong, and responses to inclusion and exclusion in inclusive common ingroups Divergent views of party positions: How ideology and own issue position shape party perception through convergence and divergence processes Corrigendum to “Tackling loneliness together: A three-tier social identity framework for social prescribing”
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1