Solidarity and Social Justice: Effect of Individual Differences in Justice Sensitivity on Solidarity Behaviour

Abstract

We investigate the effect of individual differences in justice sensitivity (JS) on giving behaviour in a solidarity game, its potential moderators and the underlying psychological mechanisms. In a solidarity game, subjects are asked to make decisions about transferring money to other players in a case in which they win a random draw and the other players lose. The results of four studies showed the following: (1) JS explains a unique portion of variance in the solidarity behaviour, above and beyond other basic personality dimensions (e.g. HEXACO model); (2) its effect does not depend on contextual factors, such as the degree of moral entitlement not to share and the possibility to attribute the recipients’ disadvantage to their own responsibility; and (3) individual differences in the emotions anticipated in response to different outcomes of a random draw and the cognitive interpretation of the allocation situation partially mediate the effect of JS on solidarity behaviour. We also provided the first evidence that JS predicts individual differences in the propensity to take away others’ earnings (antisocial behaviour). The results are discussed with respect to the research on personality as a predictor of prosocial and antisocial behaviour. Copyright © 2015 European Association of Personality Psychology

Keywords

Solidarity Justice Sensitivity Anticipated Emotions Moral Entitlement Dictator Game HEXACO

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ashton

M. C.

, & Lee

(2007). Empirical, theoretical, and practical advantages of the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11, 150–166.

Ashton

M. C.

, & Lee

(2009). The HEXACO–60: A short measure of the major dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 340–345.

Ashton

M. C.

, Lee

, & de Vries

R. E.

(2014). The HEXACO honesty–humility, agreeableness, and emotionality factors: A review of research and theory. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 18(2), 139–152. doi:10.1177/1088868314523838

Balliet

, Mulder

L. B.

, & Van Lange

P. A. M.

(2011). Reward, punishment, and cooperation: A meta–analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 137(4), 594–615. doi:10.1037/a0023489

Bandura

(1991). Social cognitive theory of self–regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 248–287.

Baumert

, Halmburger

, & Schmitt

(2013). Interventions against norm violations: Dispositional determinants of self–reported and real moral courage. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(8), 1053–1068. doi:10.1177/0146167213490032

Baumert

, Otto

, Thomas

, Bobocel

, & Schmitt

(2012). Processing of unjust and just information: Interpretation and memory performance related to dispositional victim sensitivity. European Journal of Personality, 26(2), 99–110. doi:10.1002/per.1844

Baumert

, Schlösser

, & Schmitt

(2013). Economic games: A performance–based assessment of fairness and altruism. European Journal of Psychological Assessment. doi:10.1027/1015-5759/a000183

Baumert

, & Schmitt

(2009). Justice–sensitive interpretations of ambiguous situations. Australian Journal of Psychology, 61(1), 6–12. doi:10.1080/00049530802607597

10.

Bierhoff

H.W.

(2000). Skala der sozialen Verantwortung nach Berkowitz und Daniels: Entwicklung und Validierung [Social responsibility scale by Berkowitz and Daniels: Development and validation]. Diagnostica, 46(1), 18–28.

11.

Brosig–Koch

, Helbach

, Ockenfels

, & Weimann

(2011). Still different after all these years: Solidarity behavior in East and West Germany. Journal of Public Economics, 95(11–12), 1237–1660.

12.

Buchner

, Coricelli

, & Greiner

(2007). Self–centered and other–regarding behavior in the solidarity game. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 62(2), 293–303.

13.

de Kwaadsteniet

E. W.

, van Dijk

, Wit

, & de Cremer

(2006). Social dilemmas as strong versus weak situations: Social value orientations and tacit coordination under resource size uncertainty. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42(4), 509–516. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2005.06.004

14.

Doosje

, Spears

, & Ellemers

(2002). Social identity as both cause and effect: The development of group identification in response to anticipated and actual changes in the intergroup status hierarchy. British Journal of Social Psychology, 41(1), 57.

15.

Drury

, Cocking

, & Reicher

(2009). Everyone for themselves? A comparative study of crowd solidarity among emergency survivors. British Journal of Social Psychology, 48(3), 487–506. doi:10.1348/014466608x357893

16.

Ellemers

, Spears

, & Doosje

(1997). Sticking together or falling apart: In–group identification as a psychological determinant of group commitment versus individual mobility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(3), 617–626. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.72.3.617

17.

Fetchenhauer

, & Huang

(2004). Justice sensitivity and distributive decisions in experimental games. Personality and Individual Differences, 36(5), 1015–1029.

18.

Fischbacher

(2007). z–Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready–made economic experiments. Experimental Economics, 10(2), 171–178.

19.

Fischer

, Brauns

, & Belschak

(2002). Zur Messung von Emotionen in der angewandten Forschung. Analysen mit den SAMs—Self–assessment Manikin. Lengerich: Pabst Science Publishers.

20.

Funder

D. C.

(2001). Personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 197–221. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.197

21.

Glasford

D. E.

, & Calcagno

(2012). The conflict of harmony: Intergroup contact, commonality and political solidarity between minority groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 323–328. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2011.10.001

22.

Gollwitzer

, & Rothmund

(2011). What exactly are victim–sensitive persons sensitive to? Journal of Research in Personality, 45(5), 448–455. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2011.05.003

23.

Gollwitzer

, Rothmund

, & Süssenbach

(2013). The sensitivity to mean intentions (SeMI) model: Basic assumptions, recent findings, and potential avenues for future research. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7(7), 415–426. doi:10.1111/spc3.12041

24.

Gollwitzer

, Schmitt

, Schalke

, Maes

, & Baer

(2005). Asymmetrical effects of justice sensitivity perspectives on prosocial and antisocial behavior. Social Justice Research, 18(2), 183–201. doi:10.1007/s11211-005-7368-1

25.

Hilbig

B. E.

, & Zettler

(2009). Pillars of cooperation: Honesty–humility, social value orientations, and economic behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(3), 516–519. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2009.01.003

26.

Hilbig

B. E.

, Zettler

, & Heydasch

(2012). Personality, punishment and public goods: Strategic shifts towards cooperation as a matter of dispositional honesty–humility. European Journal of Personality, 26(3), 245–254. doi:10.1002/per.830

27.

Hilbig

B. E.

, Zettler

, Leist

, & Heydasch

(2013). It takes two: Honesty–humility and agreeableness differentially predict active versus reactive cooperation. Personality and Individual Differences, 54(5), 598–603. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2012.11.008

28.

Hilbig

B. E.

, Zettler

, Moshagen

, & Heydasch

(2013). Tracing the path from personality—via cooperativeness—to conservation. European Journal of Personality, 27(4), 319–327. doi:10.1002/per.1856

29.

Hirsh

J. B.

, & Peterson

J. B.

(2009). Extraversion, neuroticism, and the prisoner's dilemma. Personality and Individual Differences, 46(2), 254–256. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.10.006

30.

Jones

D. N.

, & Figueredo

A. J.

(2013). The core of darkness: Uncovering the heart of the Dark Triad. European Journal of Personality, 27(6), 521–531. doi:10.1002/per.1893

31.

Kurzban

, & Houser

(2001). Individual differences in cooperation in a circular public goods game. European Journal of Personality, 15(S1), S37–S52. doi:10.1002/per.420

32.

Lang

P. J.

(1980). Behavioral treatment and bio–behavioral assessment: computer applications. In Sidowski

J. B.

, Johnson

J. H.

& Williams

T. A.

(Eds.), Technology in mental health care delivery systems (pp. 119–137). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

33.

Langer

E. J.

(1975). The illusion of control. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 32(2), 311–328.

34.

Le Roy

, Bastounis

, & Minibas–Poussard

(2012). Interactional justice and counterproductive work behaviors: The mediating role of negative emotions. Social Behavior & Personality: an International Journal, 40(8), 1341–1355.

35.

Lee

, Ashton

M. C.

, Wiltshire

, Bourdage

J. S.

, Visser

B. A.

, & Gallucci

(2013). Sex, power, and money: Prediction from the Dark Triad and honesty–humility. European Journal of Personality, 27(2), 169–184. doi:10.1002/per.1860

36.

Lotz

, Baumert

, Schlösser

, Gresser

, & Fetchenhauer

(2011). Individual differences in third–party interventions: How justice sensitivity shapes altruistic punishment. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 4(4), 297–313. doi:10.1111/j.1750-4716.2011.00084.x

37.

Lotz

, Schlösser

, Cain

D. M.

, & Fetchenhauer

(2013). The (in)stability of social preferences: Using justice sensitivity to predict when altruism collapses. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 93, 141–148. doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2013.07.012

38.

Lucas

R. E.

, & Donnellan

M. B.

(2009). If the person–situation debate is really over, why does it still generate so much negative affect? Journal of Research in Personality, 43(2), 146–149. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2009.02.009

39.

Murphy

, & Tyler

(2008). Procedural justice and compliance behaviour: The mediating role of emotions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38(4), 652–668. doi:10.1002/ejsp.502

40.

Perugini

, & De Raad

(2001). Editorial: Personality and economic behaviour. European Journal of Personality, 15(S1), S1–S4. doi:10.1002/per.427

41.

Preacher

K. J.

, & Hayes

A. F.

(2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891.

42.

Rothmund

, Baumert

, & Zinkernagel

(2014). The German ‘Wutbürger’: How justice sensitivity accounts for individual differences in political engagement. Social Justice Research, 27(1), 24–44. doi:10.1007/s11211-014-0202-x

43.

Rusting

C. L.

(1998). Personality, mood, and cognitive processing of emotional information: Three conceptual frameworks. Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 165–196. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.165

44.

Schlösser

, Dunning

, & Fetchenhauer

(2013). What a feeling: The role of immediate and anticipated emotions in risky decisions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 26, 13–30.

45.

Schlösser

, Lotz

, & Fetchenhauer

(2010). Who gives and who takes? The effect of justice sensitivity in public good games. Paper presented at the 13th Biennial Conference of ISJR, Banff, Canada.

46.

Schmitt

, Baumert

, Fetchenhauer

, Gollwitzer

, Rothmund

, & Schlösser

(2009). Sensibilität für Ungerechtigkeit. Psychologische Rundschau, 60(1), 8–22. doi:10.1026/0033-3042.60.1.8

47.

Schmitt

, Baumert

, Gollwitzer

, & Maes

(2010). The justice sensitivity inventory: Factorial validity, location in the personality facet space, demographic pattern, and normative data. Social Justice Research, 23(2–3), 211–238. doi:10.1007/s11211-010-0115-2

48.

Schmitt

, Gollwitzer

, Maes

, & Arbach

(2005). Justice sensitivity: Assessment and location in the personality space. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 21(3), 202–211. doi:10.1027/1015-5759.21.3.202

49.

Schmitt

, & Sabbagh

(2004). Synergistic person × situation interaction in distributive justice judgment and allocation behaviour. Personality and Individual Differences, 37(2), 359–371. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2003.09.009

50.

Selten

, & Ockenfels

(1998). An experimental solidarity game. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 34(4), 517–539. doi:10.1016/s0167-2681(97)00107-8

51.

Stavrova

, Schlösser

, & Baumert

(2014). Life satisfaction and job–seeking behavior of the unemployed: The effect of individual differences in justice sensitivity. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 64(3), 643–670. doi:10.1111/apps.12009

52.

Subašić

, Reynolds

K. J.

, & Turner

J. C.

(2008). The political solidarity model of social change: Dynamics of self–categorization in intergroup power relations. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12(4), 330–352. doi:10.1177/1088868308323223

53.

Subašić

, Schmitt

M. T.

, & Reynolds

K. J.

(2011). Are we all in this together? Co–victimization, inclusive social identity and collective action in solidarity with the disadvantaged. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50(4), 707–725. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.2011.02073.x

54.

Trhal

, & Radermacher

(2009). Bad luck vs. self–inflicted neediness—An experimental investigation of gift giving in a solidarity game. Journal of Economic Psychology, 30(4), 517–526. doi:10.1016/j.joep.2009.03.004

55.

Van Lange

P. A. M.

(1999). The pursuit of joint outcomes and equality in outcomes: An integrative model of social value orientation. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 77(2), 337–349.

56.

VanYperen

N. W.

, Hagedoorn

, Zweers

, & Postma

(2000). Injustice and employees’ destructive responses: The mediating role of state negative affect. Social Justice Research, 13(3), 291–312. doi:10.1023/a:1026411523466

57.

Zhang

, & Fishbach

(2005). The role of anticipated emotions in the endowment effect. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15(4), 316–324. doi:10.1207/s15327663jcp1504_6

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.34 MB