Keeping Up with the Joneses Affects Perceptions of Distributive Justice
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
An experimental field study investigated why people of higher social standing might jump to the conclusion that an injustice has occurred when an authority implements a program that benefits some constituents but not others. High-status individuals are uniquely vulnerable to downward mobility, especially in the event that a situation does not benefit them, but does benefit their high-status peers. In our study, students in a university course were asked to judge a bonus program by which the grades for some would increase and the grades for others would remain the same. Two framing conditions were used, each providing an example in which only one of two students would benefit from the program. In the peer-gets-ahead condition, the two students were of equal status before the program acted to differentiate them, and in the inferior-catches-up condition, the two students differed in status before the program acted to equate them. A majority of students responded favorably to the program, although this number was affected strongly by framing, with almost unanimous approval in the inferior-catches-up condition and comparatively modest approval in the peer-gets-ahead condition. Objections in the latter condition were most frequent among high-status students, who were implicitly uncomfortable with the possibility that their status could decrease relative to some of their high-status peers. Explicitly, their objections used the language of social injustice, especially claims of distributive unfairness. We argue that these perceptions of injustice are a cognitive manifestation of an aversion to any situation that could result in downward mobility.
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research. (December, 2010). Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans.
- Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 37–46. doi:10.1177/001316446002000104. CrossRef
- Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
- Degnbol-Martinussen, J., & Engberg-Pedersen, P. (2003). Aid: Understanding international development cooperation (2nd ed.). New York: Zed Books.
- Downing, L. L. (1994). Criterion shaped behaviour: Pitfalls of performance appraisal. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 2(1), 1–21. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.1994.tb00124.x. CrossRef
- Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117–140. doi:10.1177/001872675400700202. CrossRef
- Folger, R., Rosenfield, D., Grove, J., & Corkran, L. (1979). Effects of “voice” and peer opinions on responses to inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(12), 2253–2261. doi:10.1037//0022-3522.214.171.1243. CrossRef
- Garcia, S. M., Song, H., & Tesser, A. (2010). Tainted recommendations: The social comparison bias. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 113(2), 97–101. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.06.002. CrossRef
- Garcia, S. M., & Tor, A. (2007). Rankings, standards, and competition: Task vs. scale comparisons. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 102(1), 95–108. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.10.004. CrossRef
- Garcia, S. M., Tor, A., & Gonzalez, R. (2006). Ranks and rivals: A theory of competition. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(7), 970–982. doi:10.1177/0146167206287640. CrossRef
- Gigerenzer, G., & Goldstein, D. G. (1996). Reasoning the fast and frugal way: Models of bounded rationality. Psychological Review, 103(4), 650–669. doi:10.1037//0033-295X.103.4.650. CrossRef
- Gilovich, T., Griffin, D. W., & Kahneman, D. (2002). Heuristics and biases. The psychology of intuitive judgment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
- Hagedoorn, M., & Buunk, B. P. (1998). Opening the black box between justice and reactions to unfavorable outcomes in the workplace. Social Justice Research, 11(1), 41–57. doi:10.1023/A:1022180903964. CrossRef
- Hoffman, P. J., Festinger, L., & Lawrence, D. H. (1954). Tendencies toward group comparability in competitive bargaining. Human Relations, 7(2), 141–159. doi:10.1177/001872675400700203. CrossRef
- Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. CrossRef
- Lewin-Epstein, N., & Kaplan, A. (2003). Distributive justice and attitudes toward the welfare state. Social Justice Research, 16(1), 1–27. doi:10.1023/A:1022909726114. CrossRef
- Meegan, D. V. (2010). Zero-sum bias: Perceived competition despite unlimited resources. Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 1–7. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00191. CrossRef
- Miedemam, J., van den Bos, K., & Vermunt, R. (2006). The influence of self-threats on fairness judgments and affective measures. Social Justice Research, 19(2), 228–253. doi:10.1007/s11211-006-0007-7. CrossRef
- Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
- Skitka, L. J. (2002). Do the means always justify the ends, or do the ends sometimes justify the means? A value protection model of justice reasoning. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(5), 588–597. doi:10.1177/0146167202288003. CrossRef
- Tesser, A. (1988). Toward a self-evaluation maintenance model of social behavior. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 181–228). London: Academic Press.
- Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453–458. doi:10.1126/science.7455683. CrossRef
- van den Bos, K., Lind, E. A., & Wilke, H. A. M. (2001). The psychology of procedural and distributive justice viewed from the perspective of fairness heuristic theory. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: Volume 2—From theory to practice (2nd ed., pp. 49–66). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- West, S. A., Gardner, A., Shuker, D. M., Reynolds, T., Burton-Chellow, M., Sykes, E. M., et al. (2006). Cooperation and the scale of competition in humans. Current Biology, 16(11), 1103–1106. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2006.03.069. CrossRef
- Keeping Up with the Joneses Affects Perceptions of Distributive Justice
Social Justice Research
Volume 26, Issue 2 , pp 120-131
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- Social status
- Procedural justice
- Distributive justice