PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Carolyn L Hafer

Publications and source records attributed to Carolyn L Hafer.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Experimental research on just-world theory: problems, developments, and future challenges.

M. J. Lerner (1980) proposed that people need to believe in a just world; thus, evidence that the world is not just is threatening, and people have a number of strategies for reducing such threats. Early research on this idea, and on just-world theory more broadly, was reviewed in early publications (e.g., M. J. Lerner, 1980; M. J. Lerner & D. T. Miller, 1978). In the present article, focus is directed on the post-1980 experimental research on this theory. First, 2 conceptualizations of the term belief in a just world are described, the typical experimental paradigms are explained, and a general overview of the post-1980 experiments is provided. Second, problems with this literature are discussed, including the unsystematic nature of the research. Third, important developments that have occurred, despite the problems reviewed, are described. Finally, theoretical challenges that researchers should address if this area of inquiry is to advance in the future are discussed.

Culture↗

An analysis of empirical research on the scope of justice.

The scope of justice has been defined as the boundary within which justice is perceived to be relevant. The empirical literature on this topic is primarily aimed at predicting when a target will be excluded from the scope of justice and at examining potential consequences of exclusion, from accepting a target's suffering to active harm-doing such as mass internment and genocide. The concept of the scope of justice is interesting and heuristically useful, but there are several problems with the empirical literature that impede its progress. For example, the proposed mediator often has not been measured, or operationalizations of the scope of justice have been confounded with other constructs. Also, although the scope of justice remains one possible explanation for results obtained in various experiments, there are equally compelling alternatives that do not implicate exclusion from the scope of justice. We offer suggestions about how to study scope of justice issues in the future and identify points that need to be clarified regarding the conceptualization of the scope of justice.

Concentration Camps↗