Targeted Fathers’ Beliefs in a Just World

Abstract

This study compares targeted fathers’ beliefs in a just world with the beliefs of fathers who were divorced but not alienated from their children. Forty-two targeted fathers and 38 non-targeted fathers completed an online survey consisting of sociodemographic questions, the General Belief in a Just World Scale and Personal Belief in a Just World Scale. Targeted fathers reported lower beliefs in a just world than non-targeted fathers. Targeted fathers who reported that mental health and legal professionals have sufficient knowledge of parental alienation had higher belief in a just world scores than targeted parents who believed professionals have insufficient knowledge.

Keywords

parental alienation targeted parent targeted father alienated father belief in a just world

Parental alienation occurs when a child is influenced by one parent to align with them and become preoccupied with unjustified and/or exaggerated denigration of the other parent. Consequently, the child rejects the other parent (targeted/alienated parent) without legitimate justification (Bernet & Baker, 2013; Bernet, Boch-Galhau, Baker, & Morrison, 2010). This typically occurs in the context of contentious custody disputes after family separation. The rejected parent is often referred in the literature as the targeted parent and/or alienated parent because they are the target of a campaign of alienation tactics that can ultimately lead to them being alienated from their child (Haines, et al., 2020).

Parental alienation is different from estrangement whereby the child chooses to reject a parent for justifiable reasons as seen in cases of neglect and abuse perpetrated by the rejected parent (Kelly & Johnston, 2001). Previous research considered parental alienation to be pathology diagnosed in the child who rejects the targeted parent (Gardner, 1992; 2002). This ideology has been criticized as a limited approach to this complex phenomenon (Haines, Matthewson, & Turnbull, 2020). More recently literature has proposed a Five-Factor Model for identifying parental alienation (Baker, 2020). According to Baker (2020), for parental alienation to occur the following factors must be present:

1. The child must actively avoid, resist, or refuse a relationship with a parent (the targeted parent).

2. The relationship between the child and the targeted parent was once positive.

3. There is no evidence of abuse or neglect or seriously deficient parenting on the part of the targeted parent.

4. Multiple alienating behaviors have been used by the alienating parent

5. The child exhibits many behavioral manifestations of the alienation.

It has been suggested that parental alienation should be considered as a form of family violence because of the coercive control that is central to the behaviors used by alienating parents (Harman, Kruk & Hines, 2018; Haines, Matthewson & Turnbull, 2020). Consistent with this view, recent research on the impact of alienating behaviors on targeted parents has found that targeted parents experience poor mental health outcomes including trauma reactions, depression, anxiety, fear, frustration, insomnia, helplessness, and feelings of powerlessness as a consequence of experiencing parental alienating behaviors (Baker, 2010; Baker & Andre, 2008; Balmer, Matthewson, & Haines, 2018; Giancarlo & Rottmann, 2015; Kopetski, 1998). Targeted parents also experience disenfranchised grief from the ambiguous loss of their child from parental alienating behaviors (Lee-Maturana, Matthewson, & Dwan, 2020). For example, Lee-Maturana, Matthewson, and Dwan (2020) found that targeted parents experience considerable psychological distress because of being alienated from a child, with 23% of their sample having had attempted suicide and 44% stating they were not coping. Fifty-seven percent of the total sample described engaging in cognitive distortions such as all-or-nothing thinking, overgeneralization, mind reading, catastrophizing, labeling, and personalizating. Recent research has found that targeted parents experience feelings of injustice and guilt (Tavares, Crespo, & Ribeiro, 2021). Participants in this study had trouble finding and following an effective course of action to resolve the alienation because of the absence of effective support services as well as society’s view of parental alienation. This is consistent with the findings of other studies (Poustie, et al., 2018) who found that targeted parents considered services offered by mental health and legal professionals as slow, ineffective, uncaring, financially prohibitive, and contributors to the alienation.

Targeted parents have also reported facing barriers to discussing their experience and obtaining help because parental alienation is poorly understood by professionals and non-professionals alike in society (Lee-Maturana, et al., 2018; Tavares, Crespo, & Ribeiro, 2021). Some studies have shown that mental health and legal professionals are lacking sufficient knowledge of how best to support individuals and families affected by parental alienation (Bow, Gould & Flens, 2009; Torun, Torun & Matthewson, 2021). Given the experience of targeted parents, it would be unsurprising if many targeted parents believed that justice is out of reach in their particular circumstances.

Belief in a just world (BJW) is a theory that may help to explain the experience of targeted parents. BJW is based on the premise that people tend to believe that the world is just, and that people get what they deserve (Lerner, 1965). The BJW provides a framework for individuals to interpret their personal lives in a meaningful way (Correria & Dalbert, 2008). For example, people tend to believe that when injustice occurs, justice will prevail by way of compensatory systems in society. If the injustice cannot be resolved in this way, people tend to restore justice cognitively by re-evaluating the situation in line with their belief in a just world (Lerner & Miller, 1978). Because of this adaptive function of BJW, individuals are driven to defend their beliefs in the face of a threat or injustice. The belief that the world is a just place reassures people that they will be treated fairly, they will not become victims for no reason, and that they can invest in their future with confidence. The strength of the BJW differs between individuals (Rubin & Peplau, 1973; 1975). BJW has been associated with greater well-being, more effective coping, and less intense negative emotions (Dalbert, 1999; 2002).

Belief in a just world has two important functions. People high in BJW are more likely to invest in their future because they think their behaviors will be fairly rewarded (Hafer, 2000). They are confident that they will be treated fairly and are less distressed by the demands of others (Tomaka & Blaskovich, 1994). Thus, if people are confronted with an injustice, it threatens the belief that justice prevails. Individuals high in BJW therefore try to restore justice either in reality or psychologically.

Research has shown that targeted parents experience injustice in many ways. Targeted parents are often the target of false allegations of abuse and violence where they are forced to defend their innocence (Baker & Fine, 2014). They often find no satisfactory outcomes by engaging in the systems they believe will resolve the alienation (Poustie et al., 2018). Despite this, there are no studies to date exploring targeted parents’ beliefs in a just world and whether they are different or similar to those of parents who have not experienced alienation from a child. In this study, we aimed to compare targeted parents’ personal and general belief in a just world with the beliefs of parents who were divorced but not alienated from their children. The study also aimed to examine if targeted parents’ beliefs in a just world were higher or lower if they believed they mental health and legal practitioners had sufficient knowledge of PA.

Method

Participants and Procedure

This study was conducted via an online survey. Participants were recruited through advertisement on social media, organizations supporting targeted parents, and parents who came to a psychiatrist for examination. The study was open to mothers and fathers in Turkey to participate, however, only fathers completed surveys. A total of 42 targeted fathers and 38 fathers who were divorced but not alienated from their children were included in the study. The participants were informed of the purpose of the study and how to complete the survey online by the first author. Before completing the survey, participants’ consent to participate was obtained. Ethics approval was obtained from the Istanbul Yeni Yüzyıl University Ethics Committee on Science, Social and Non-Interventional Health Sciences Research approved the study (Number: 2020/04-05).

Materials

Sociodemographic Form

A sociodemographic survey was developed by the researchers and used for the study. This survey includes questions pertaining to demographic data of the targeted father and their child, divorce process, and custody status. This survey asked participants a series of questions to determine if the participant was a targeted father or a father who was divorced but not alienated from their children.

Belief in a Just World Scale

Beliefs in a just world were measured using the Personal Belief in a Just World Scale and the General Belief in a Just World Scale (Dalbert, 1999). The General Belief in a Just World Scale consists of six items, for example, “I think basically the world is a just place.” The Personal Belief in a Just World Scale has seven items, for example, “I am usually treated fairly.” Participants responded to all items on a 6-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). Both scales were translated into Turkish (Göregenli, 2003). Participants were also asked about their perception of the level of knowledge and attitudes about PA the professionals they encountered have, and their thoughts on whether their relationship with their children will somehow improve. The full survey was completed via Googleforms.

Statistical Analysis

Basic descriptive statistics were computed for all variables and reported as number of cases (frequency) and percentage for categorical variables and means and standard deviation (SD) or medians as appropriate for continuous variables. The difference between the categorical variables was analyzed using Chi-square (χ²). T-test for independent groups or one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine the difference between the continuous variables. Data analyses was performed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25.0. An alpha level of 0.05 was adopted. All significance tests were two-tailed.

Results

The mean age of targeted fathers was 43.74 ± 6.09 and non-targeted fathers was 42.47 ± 6.06 and the difference between groups was not statistically different (p = 0.35). Education, income, duration of marriage, form of divorce and duration of divorce case, number of common children did not differ between the two groups (p > 0.05). (Table 1).

Table 1.

Sociodemographic and Other Features of Participants.

	Targeted Parents	Non-Targeted Parents
	Mean ± SD (min-max)	Mean ± SD (min-max)	p
Age	43.74 ± 6.09 (33–56)	42.47 ± 6.06 (30–60)	0.35
	n (%)	n (%)
Gender
Male	42 (100)	38 (100)
Education
High school and below	10 (23.8)	6 (15.8)	0.37
University and above	32 (76.2)	32 (84.2)	0.37
Income			0.77
Good-very good	11 (26.2)	8 (21.1)
Middle	26 (61.9)	26 (68.4)
Bad	5 (11.9)	4 (10.5)
Length of marriage
<1year	2 (4.8)	0	0.55
1–3 years	5 (11.9)	7 (18.4)
3–5 years	7 (16.7)	6 (15.8)
5–10 years	10 (23.8)	14 (36.8)
10–15 years	11 (26.2)	7 (18.4)
15 years<	7 (16.7)	4 (10.5)
Divorce
Contentious	33 (78.6)	31 (81.6)	0.74
Non-contentious	9 (21.4)	7 (18.4)	0.74
Duration of the divorce case
<1 year	11 (26.2)	6 (15.8)	0.34
1–2 years	9 (21.4)	9 (23.7)
2–3 years	9 (21.4)	9 (23.7)
3 years <	13 (31.0)	14 (36.8)
Number of common children
1	17 (40.5)	22 (57.9)	0.20
2	22 (52.4)	13 (34.2)
3	2 (4.8)	3 (7.9)
4	1 (2.4)	0

A significant difference was found between the targeted fathers and non-targeted fathers in relation to their personal and general beliefs in a just world. Non-targeted fathers reported stronger personal and general just world beliefs than did targeted fathers (p < 0.05) (Table 2).

Table 2.

Belief in a Just World Scales of Targeted Fathers and Non-Targeted Fathers.

	Targeted Parents (n = 42)	Non-Targeted Parents (n = 38)
	Mean ± SD	Mean ± SD	p
I believe that, by and large, I deserve what happens to me	1.90	2.92	0.00
I believe that, by and large, I deserve what happens to me	(0.87)	(0.85)
I am usually treated fairly	1.81	2.71	0.00
I am usually treated fairly	(0.91)	(0.80)
I believe that I usually get what I deserve	1.81	2.89	0.00
I believe that I usually get what I deserve	(1.01)	(0.83)
Overall, events in my life are just	1.79	2.84	0.00
Overall, events in my life are just	(1.00)	(0.78)
In my life injustice is the exception rather than the rule	2.48	3.03	0.02
In my life injustice is the exception rather than the rule	(1.34)	(0.71)
I believe that most of the things that happen in my life are fair	2.19	2.74	0.01
	(1.04)	(0.89)
I think that important decisions that are made concerning me are usually just	1.76	3.05	0.00
	(0.85)	(0.73)
I think basically the world is a just place	2.10	2.92	0.00
I think basically the world is a just place	(1.03)	(0.99)
I believe that, by and large, people get what they deserve	2.98	3.55	0.01
I believe that, by and large, people get what they deserve	(1.13)	(0.92)
I am confident that justice always prevails over injustice	2.57	3.45	0.00
I am confident that justice always prevails over injustice	(1.03)	(0.92)
I am convinced that in the long run people will be compensated for injustices	2.55	3.39	0.00
	(0.80)	(0.71)
I firmly believe that injustices in all areas of life (e.g., professional, family, politics) are the exception rather than the rule	2.60	3.29	0.01
	(0.91)	(0.92)
I think people try to be fairly when making important decisions	2.33	3.58	0.00
	(0.95)	(0.97)
Personal BJW (Total scores)	13.74	20.18	0.00
Personal BJW (Total scores)	(5.45)	(4.03)
General BJW (Total scores)	15.64	20.03	0.00
General BJW (Total scores)	(4.19)	(3.80)
BJW (Total scores)	29.38	40.21	0.00
BJW (Total scores)	(8.32)	(7.01)

73.8% of the targeted fathers in this study stated that the mental health professionals they met had insufficient knowledge of parental alienation. Targeted fathers who believed that mental health professionals have enough information about parental alienation had higher BJW scores than targeted parents who did not believe mental health professionals had sufficient information about parental alienation (p < 0.05). 69.0% of targeted fathers reported that they did not receive enough support from mental health professionals. These targeted parents had significantly lower BJW scores than targeted fathers who reported receiving enough support from mental health practitioners (p < 0.05). 71.4% of the participants reported that the lawyers and judges they encountered had insufficient knowledge of PA. These targeted parents had significantly lower BJW scores than those who reported that lawyers and judges have sufficient knowledge of PA (p < 0.05). 54.8% of targeted parents believe that the relationship with their children would improve. BJW scores were found to be higher in parents who thought that their relationship with their child would not improve (p < 0.05) (Table 3).

Table 3.

Participants' Opinions About Mental Health and Legal Professionals and Belief in a Just World.

	PBJW			GBJW			BJW Total
	YesMean ± SD	NoMean ± SD	p	YesMean ± SD	NoMean ± SD	p	YesMean ± SD	NoMean ± SD	p
Do you think the mental health professionals you encounter have enough knowledge of PAS?	17.36 ± 6.23 (n = 11)	12.45 ± 4.60 (n = 31)	0.00	18.27 ± 3.79 (n = 11)	14.71 ± 3.97 (n = 31)	0.01	35.64 ± 8.32 (n = 11)	27.16 ± 7.21 (n = 31)	0.00
Do you think you can get enough support from the mental health professionals you meet?	18.77 ± 6.05 (n = 13)	11.48 ± 3.29 (n = 29)	0.00	18.85 ± 3.46 (n = 13)	14.21 ± 3.70 (n = 29)	0.00	37.62 ± 7.94 (n = 13)	25.69 ± 5.35 (n = 29)	0.00
Do you think that the legal professionals you meet have enough knowledge about the PAS?	19.00 ± 5.67 (n = 12)	11.63 ± 3.71 (n = 30)	0.00	19.58 ± 3.31 (n = 12)	14.07 ± 3.42 (n = 30)	0.00	38.58 ± 6.81 (n = 12)	25.70 ± 5.58 (n = 30)	0.00
Do you think that the relationship with your child will somehow improve?	16.83 ± 5.38 (n = 23)	10.00 ± 2.33 (n = 19)	0.00	18.26 ± 3.30 (n = 23)	12.47 ± 2.71 (n = 19)	0.00	35.09 ± 6.68 (n = 23)	22.47 ± 3.33 (n = 19)	0.00

PBJW: Personal Belief in a Just World; GBJW: General Belief in a Just World; BJW: Belief in a Just World.

Discussion

This study aimed to compare targeted parents’ personal and general belief in a just world with the beliefs of parents who were divorced but not alienated to their children. The study also aimed to examine if targeted parents’ beliefs in a just world were higher or lower if they believed their mental health and legal practitioners had sufficient knowledge of PA. We found that non-targeted fathers had stronger personal and general just world beliefs than targeted fathers (p < 0.05). Research has shown that experiencing injustice directly is one of the most important factors affecting BJW (Göregenli, 2003). Recent research has shown that parental alienation is considered an unrecognized and poorly understood form of family violence (Haines, et al., 2020; Harman, Kruk, & Hines, 2018). Several studies have shown that targeted parents are particularly dissatisfied with the systems and services available to them (Lee-Maturana et al., 2018; Poustie et al., 2018). Indeed, research has shown that parental alienation is poorly understood by practitioners (Bow et al., 2009); and the systems and services available to targeted parents are often ineffective in resolving the alienation (Poustie et al., 2018). When this is considered, it is unsurprising that the targeted fathers in this study had lower BJW scores than fathers who had not experienced similar injustices.

Most targeted fathers in this study were of the view that the mental health and legal professionals they had encountered had insufficient knowledge and information about PA. The targeted parents who believed they were supported by mental health and legal professionals had higher BJW than the targeted parents who felt unsupported by mental health and legal professionals. One of the functions of BJW is the idea that the individual will be treated fairly by others and will be treated in a fair and just way in the face of tragedy (Dalbert, 2001). Studies have also found a positive relationship between BJW and justice judgment in various domains of life (Dalbert & Stoeber, 2006; Dzuka & Dalbert, 2007). As such, it is unsurprising that targeted parents who have not found the professional support needed to help them endure the injustices targeted parents face come to belief the world is an unjust place.

In our study, just over half of the participants believe the relationship with their children will improve in some way. BJW was found to be higher in these fathers than those who did not have the same hope. It is possible that it is these fathers’ BJW that is helping them to maintain this hope. BJW serves important adaptive purposes for individuals to maintain their well-being. BJW and well-being are positively correlated for people engaged in typical day-to-day activities as well as for people who are threatened by an unjust fate (Dalbert, 1998; Hafer & Correy, 1999). Holding strong BJW may help to preserve hope in those individuals who are faced with intractable adversity (Dalbert, 1998).

Implications for Practice

It is important that mental health practitioners, lawyers, prosecutors, and judges have sufficient knowledge and information about PA. If these professionals have sufficient information and knowledge of PA, they may be able to prevent the development of PA through timely and appropriate interventions (Templer, Matthewson, Haines, & Cox, 2017). The results of this study have shown that targeted fathers have difficulty believing in a just world in comparison to the parents who have not had the same experiences. Further, it seems that the experiences targeted fathers have when they seek help for their situations may influence their perception of justice. It is important that mental health and legal practitioners are aware of the predicament targeted father face and the psychological distress they experience. This is because an ill-informed practitioner will likely add to the targeted parents’ distress (Lee-Maturana, Matthewson, & Dwan, 2020). Mental health and legal practitioners need to become knowledgeable in parental alienation in order to avoid precipitating and/or perpetuating further injustice faced by targeted parents. The findings of this research add to those of previous research showing that when mental health and legal practitioners lack an understanding of parental alienation and its consequences, the outcomes for targeted parents are an exacerbation of their feelings of hopelessness, desperation, loneliness, anxiety, insecurity, and belief in a just world (Baker & Fine, 2014; Lee-Maturana, et al., 2018). The existence of parental alienation in Turkey cannot be ignored and trained professionals able to deliver evidence-based interventions to address it are necessary.

Limitations and Directions for Future Research

Although this study provides important insights into the experience of targeted parents in Turkey, our study has some limitations. Firstly, the current study is an online survey and provides information about the targeted parent experience who participated the survey voluntarily. Selection bias is an important limitation of most online surveys. Voluntary participation may include respondents with biases which may have participated the survey. Results of our study cannot be generalized to all targeted parent population. The sample consists of divorced and targeted fathers and not mothers. Participants in this study were fathers because there are a number of associations and platforms in Turkey supporting divorced fathers. The existence of these organizations enabled our survey to be distributed easily to fathers. To the authors’ knowledge, there are no such associations for divorced mothers in Turkey, making it difficult for the survey to be disseminated to them. Consequently, we are uncertain if these results are truly reflective of the experience of targeted parents in Turkey or this is a limitation of our recruitment strategy. Importantly, there is no way of verifying if the sample consists of fathers who are indeed alienated from their child as a result of alienating behaviors. Future research in Turkey should aim to recruit mothers and fathers. Nonetheless, this study provides important insights into the experience of targeted parents in Turkey.

The strength of this study is that it focuses on an area of research that has not been conducted before. Further, it is one of a small number of studies conducted into the experience of targeted parents in Turkey. More research is needed to further understand the experiences of individual affected by parental alienation in Turkey. Further, more research is needed into the role BJW might play in outcomes for targeted parents. Specifically, it would be useful to know if BJW indeed buffer against adverse psychological outcomes for targeted parents.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank the fathers who generously participated in this research and the organizations that supported it.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the University of Istanbul Yeni Yuzyıl University Science, Social and Non-Interventional Health Sciences Research Ethics Committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

ORCID iDs

Fuat Torun

Sebahat Dilek Torun

References

Baker

A. J. L.

(2010). Even when you win you lose: Targeted parents' perceptions of their attorneys. American Journal of Family Therapy, 38(4), 292-309 https://doi.org/10.1080/01926187.2010.493429

Baker

A. J. L.

(2020). Parental alienation and empirical research. In Lorandos

Bernet

(Eds.), Parental alienation – science and law (pp. 207-253). Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.

Baker

A. J. L.

Andre

(2008). Working with alienated children and their targeted parents: Suggestions for sound practices for mental health professionals. Annals of the American Psychotherapy Association, 11, 10-17.

Baker

A. J. L.

Fine

P. R.

(2014). Surviving parental alienation: A journey of hope and healing. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Balmer

Matthewson

Haines

(2018). Parental alienation: Targeted parent perspective. Australian Journal of Psychology, 70(1), 91-99 https://doi.org/10.1111/ajpy.12159

Bernet

Baker

A. J. L.

(2013). Parental Alienation, DSM-5, and ICD-11: Response to Critics. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online, 41(1), 98-104.

Bernet

Boch-Galhau

W. von

Baker

A. J. L.

Morrison

S. L.

(2010). Parental Alienation, DSM-V, and ICD-11. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 38(2), 76-187 https://doi.org/10.1080/01926180903586583

Bow

J. N.

Gould

J. W.

Flens

J. R.

(2009). Examining parental alienation in child custody cases: A survey of mental health and legal professionals. American Journal of Family Therapy, 37(2), 127-145 https://doi.org/10.1080/01926180801960658

Correria

Dalbert

(2008). School bullying: Belief in a personal just world of bullies, victims, and defenders. European Psychologist, 13(4), 248-254 https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040.13.4.248

10.

Dalbert

(1998). Belief in a Just World, Well-Being, and Coping with an Unjust Fate. In Montada

Lerner

M. J.

(Eds.), Responses to victimizations and belief in a just world. Critical issues in social justice. Boston, MA: Springer.

11.

Dalbert

(1999). The world is more just for me than generally: About the personal belief in a just world scale’s validity. Social Justice Research, 12, 79-98.

12.

Dalbert

(2001). The justice motive as a personal resource: Dealing with challenges and critical life events. New York: Kluwer Academic /Plenum Publishers.

13.

Dalbert

(2002). Beliefs in a just world as a buffer against anger. Social Justice Research, 15(2), 123-145 https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1019919822628

14.

Dalbert

Stoeber

(2006). The belief in a just world and domain-specific beliefs about justice at school and in the family: A longitudinal study with adolescents. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 30(3), 200-207 https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025406063638

15.

Dzuka

Dalbert

(2007). Student violence against teachers: Teachers’ well-being and the belief in a just world. European Psychologist, 12(4), 253-260 https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040.12.4.253

16.

Gardner

R. A.

(1992). The parental alienation syndrome. A guide for mental health and legal professionals. Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics.

17.

Gardner

R. A.

(2002). Parental alienation syndrome vs. parental alienation: Which diagnosis should evaluators use in child-custody disputes? American Journal of Family Therapy, 30(2), 93-115 https://doi.org/10.1080/019261802753573821

18.

Giancarlo

Rottmann

(2015). Kids come last: the effect of family law involvement in parental alienation. The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences: Annual Review, 9(1), 27-43 https://doi.org/10.18848/1833-1882/cgp/v09/53552

19.

Göregenli

(2003). Şiddet, kötü muamele, ve işkenceye ilişkin değerlendirmeler, tutumlar, ve deneyimler [Evaluations, attitudes, experiences regarding violence, maltreatment, and torture]. In, İşkencenin Önlenmesinde Hukukçuların rolü projesi raporu. İzmir.

20.

Hafer

C. L.

(2000). Investment in long-term goals and commitment to just means drive the need to believe in a just world. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(9), 1059-1073 https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672002611004

21.

Hafer

C. L.

Correy

B. L.

(1999). Mediators of the relation of beliefs in a just world and emotional responses to negative outcomes. Social Justice Research, 12(3), 189-204 https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1022144317302

22.

Haines

Matthewson

Turnbull

(2020). Understanding and managing parental alienation: A guide to assessment and intervention. London: Routledge.

23.

Harman

J. J.

Kruk

Hines

(2018). Parental alienating behaviors: An unacknowledged form of family violence. Psychological Bulletin, 144(12), 1275-1299 https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1037/bul0000175

24.

Kelly

J. B.

Johnston

J. R.

(2001). The Alienated Child: A Reformulation of Parental Alienation Syndrome. Family Court Review, 39(3), 249-266 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.174-1617.2001.tb00609

25.

Kopetski

L. M.

(1998). Identifying cases of parental alienation syndrome—Part II. The Colorado Lawyer, 27, 61-64.

26.

Lee-Maturana

Matthewson

M. L.

Dwan

(2020). Targeted parents surviving parental alienation: Consequences of the alienation and coping strategies. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 29(8), 2268-2280 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-020-01725-1

27.

Lee-Maturana

Matthewson

Dwan

Norris

(2018). Characteristics and experiences of targeted parents of parental alienation from their own perspective: a systematic literature review. Australian Journal of Psychology, 71(2), 1-9 https://doi.org/10.1111/ajpy.12226

28.

Lerner

M. J.

(1965). Evaluation of performance as a function of performer’s reward and attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1(4), 355-360 https://doi.org/10.1037/h0021806

29.

Lerner

M. J.

Miller

D. T.

(1978). Just world research and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead. Psychological Bulletin, 85(5), 1030-1051 https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.85.5.1030

30.

Poustie

Matthewson

Balmer

(2018). The forgotten parent: The targeted parent perspective of parental alienation. Journal of Family Issues, 39(12), 3298-3323 https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513x18777867

31.

Rubin

Peplau

L. A.

(1973). Belief in a just world and reactions to another’s lot: A study of participants in the national draft lottery. Journal of Social Issues, 29(4), 73-93 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1973.tb00104.x

32.

Rubin

Peplau

L. A.

(1975). Who believes in a just world? Journal of Social Issues, 31(3), 65-89 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1975.tb00997.x

33.

Tavares

Crespo

Ribeiro

M. T.

(2021). What Does it Mean to be a Targeted Parent? Parents’ Experiences in the Context of Parental Alienation. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 30(5), 1-11 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-021-01914-6

34.

Templer

Matthewson

Haines

Cox

(2017). Recommendations for best practice response to parental alienation: Findings from a systematic review. Journal of Family Therapy, 39(1), 103-122 https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6427.12137

35.

Tomaka

Blaskovich

(1994). Effects of justice beliefs on cognitive appraisal of and subjective, physiological, and behavioral responses to potential stress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(4), 732-740 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.732

36.

Torun

S. D.

Matthewson

M. L.

(2021). Parental alienation: Targeted parent perspective in Turkey. American Journal of Family Therapy, 50(2), 195-204 https://doi.org/10.1080/01926187.2021.1895903