Abstract
The majority of research in social justice, indeed in all of social science, is incremental, has received few citations, has garnered little attention in the public, and can be viewed as dull and uninteresting by both academics and lay readers. Although often well versed in a variety of methodological techniques for testing research questions, we rarely receive explicit guidance in how to construct them in a way that is interesting, useful, and pushes theory forward. A novel “problematization” approach for constructing interesting research questions has been proposed by Alvesson and Sandberg (Constructing research questions: doing interesting research. Sage Publications, London, 2013). In this essay, I introduce the problematization method to social justice scholars in a comprehensive review and critique that identifies the benefits and limitations of the approach. Then, to provide a cursory illustration of the method in practice, I problematize the domain of retributive justice, attempting to identify potentially interesting directions for future research inquiry.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alvesson, M., & Sandberg, J. (2013). Constructing research questions: Doing interesting research. London: Sage Publications.
Aquino, K., & Reed, A., I. I. (2002). The self-importance of moral identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1423.
Aristotle. (1976). The ethics of Aristotle: The Nichomachean ethics (J. A. K. Thompson, Trans., H. Tredennick, Revised). London: Penguin Books.
Barry, H., & Tyler, T. R. (2009). The other side of injustice: When unfair procedures increase group-serving behavior. Psychological Science, 20(8), 1026–1032.
Bastian, B., Jetten, J., & Fasoli, F. (2011). Cleansing the soul by hurting the flesh: The guilt-reducing effect of pain. Psychological Science, 22, 334–335.
Bastian, B., Jetten, J., Hornsey, M. J., & Leknes, S. (2014). The positive consequences of pain: A biopsychosocial approach. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 18(3), 256–279.
Braithwaite, J. (1998). Restorative justice. In M. Tonry (Ed.), The handbook of crime and punishment (pp. 323–344). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brockner, J., Senior, D., & Welch, W. (2014). Corporate volunteerism, the experience of self-integrity, and organizational commitment: Evidence from the field. Social Justice Research, 27(1), 1–23.
Budner, S. (1962). Intolerance of ambiguity as a personality variable. Journal of Personality, 30(1), 29–50.
Carlsmith, K. M., Wilson, T. D., & Gilbert, D. T. (2008). The paradoxical consequences of revenge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1316–1324.
Corley, K. G., & Gioia, D. A. (2011). Building theory about theory building: What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 36, 12–32.
Davis, M. S. (1971). That’s interesting!: Towards a phenomenology of sociology and a sociology of phenomenology. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 1, 309–344.
Dutton, J. E., Dukerich, J. M., & Harquail, C. V. (1994). Organizational images and member identification. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(2), 239–263.
Exline, J. J., Worthington, E. L., Jr., Hill, P., & McCullough, M. E. (2003). Forgiveness and justice: A research agenda for social and personality psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 337–348.
Funk, F., McGeer, V., & Gollwitzer, M. (2014). Get the message: Punishment is satisfying if the transgressor responds to its communicative intent. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(8), 986–997.
Greenberg, J. (1982). Approaching equity and avoiding inequity in groups and organizations. In J. Greenberg & R. L. Cohen (Eds.), Equity and justice in social behavior (pp. 389–435). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108, 814–834.
Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. New York: Pantheon.
Janoff-Bulman, R., Sheikh, S., & Hepp, S. (2009). Proscriptive versus prescriptive morality: Two faces of moral regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 521–537.
Jost, J. T., Chaikalis-Petritsis, V., Abrams, D., Sidanius, J., van der Toorn, J., & Bratt, C. (2012). Why men (and women) do and don’t rebel: Effects of system justification on willingness to protest. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 197–208.
Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York: Springer.
Liviatan, I., & Jost, J. T. (2011). System justification theory: Motivated social cognition in the service of the status quo. Social Cognition, 29, 231–237.
Mentovich, A., Rhee, E., & Tyler, T. R. (2014). My life for a voice: The influence of voice on health-care decisions. Social Justice Research, 27(1), 99–117.
Okimoto, T. G., & Wenzel, M. (2008). The symbolic meaning of transgressions: Towards a unifying framework of justice restoration. In K. A. Hegtvedt & J. Clay-Warner (Eds.), Advances in group processes: Justice (Vol. 25, pp. 291–326). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Okimoto, T. G., & Wenzel, M. (2009). Punishment as restoration of group and offender values following a transgression: Value consensus through symbolic labelling and offender reform. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 346–367.
Okimoto, T. G., & Wenzel, M. (2010). The symbolic identity implications of inter and intra-group transgressions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 552–562.
Okimoto, T. G., & Wenzel, M. (2011). Third-party punishment and symbolic intragroup status. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 709–718.
Okimoto, T. G., Wenzel, M., & Hedrick, K. (2013). Refusing to apologize can have psychological benefits (and we issue no mea culpa for this research finding). European Journal of Social Psychology, 43(1), 22–31.
Oswald, M. E., & Stucki, I. (2009). A two-process model of punishment. In M. E. Oswald, S. Bieneck, & J. Hupfeld-Heinemann (Eds.), Social psychology of punishment of crime (pp. 173–191). New York: Wiley.
Parris, C. L., Hegtvedt, K. A., Watson, L. A., & Johnson, C. (2014). Justice for all? Factors affecting perceptions of environmental and ecological injustice. Social Justice Research, 27(1), 67–98.
Rothmund, T., Baumert, A., & Zinkernagel, A. (2014). The German “Wutbürger”: How justice sensitivity accounts for individual differences in political engagement. Social Justice Research, 27(1), 24–44.
Sabbagh, C., & Schmitt, M. (Eds.). (2014). Handbook of social justice theory and research. New York: Springer.
Sabbagh, C., & Vanhuysse, P. (2014). Betwixt and between global and domestic forms of justice: The Israeli case over time. Social Justice Research, 27(1), 118–136.
Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (2001). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Smith, J. R., & Louis, W. R. (2008). Do as we say and as we do: The interplay of descriptive and injunctive group norms in the attitude–behaviour relationship. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47(4), 647–666.
Tetlock, P. E. (2002). Social-functionalist metaphors for judgment and choice: The intuitive politician, theologian, and prosecutor. Psychological Review, 109, 451–471.
Waytz, A., Dungan, J., & Young, L. (2013). The whistleblower’s dilemma and the fairness–loyalty tradeoff. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(6), 1027–1033.
Wenzel, M., & Okimoto, T. G. (2014a). Retributive justice. In C. Sabbagh & M. Schmitt (Eds.), Handbook of social justice theory and research. New York: Springer.
Wenzel, M., & Okimoto, T. G. (2014b). On the relationship between justice and forgiveness: Are all forms of justice made equal? British Journal of Social Psychology. doi:10.1111/bjso.12040.
Wenzel, M., Okimoto, T. G., Feather, N. T., & Platow, M. J. (2008). Retributive and restorative justice. Law and Human Behavior, 32, 375–389.
West, C., & Zimmerman, D. (1987). Doing gender. Gender and Society, 1, 125–151.
Wevodau, A. L., Cramer, R. J., Clark, J. W., I. I. I., & Kehn, A. (2014). The role of emotion and cognition in juror perceptions of victim impact statements. Social Justice Research, 27(1), 45–66.
Worthington, E. L. (2006). Forgiveness and reconciliation: Theory and application. New York: Routledge.
Wright, S. C., & Baray, G. (2012). Models of social change in social psychology: Collective action or prejudice reduction, conflict or harmony. In J. Dixon & M. Levine (Eds.), Beyond prejudice: Extending the social psychology of intergroup conflict, inequality and social change (pp. 225–247). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Acknowledgments
The author would like to acknowledge Mats Alvesson and Jörgen Sandberg for open discussions about their method and workshopping its application. The author also would like to thank Andrew Burton-Jones for suggestions with the critique, Dena Gromet and David Rooney for feedback on early drafts, and Michael Wenzel for leading the extensive review on retributive justice that was essential to the development of this essay.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Okimoto, T.G. Toward More Interesting Research Questions: Problematizing Theory in Social Justice. Soc Just Res 27, 395–411 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-014-0215-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-014-0215-5