Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Justice Concerns Can Feed Nationalistic Concerns and Impede Solidarity in the Euro Crisis: How Victim Sensitivity Translates into Political Attitudes

  • Published:
Social Justice Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We investigated how victim sensitivity and news media exposure conjointly contribute to the formation of political attitudes in the context of the euro crisis. Study 1 (N = 208) showed that observer-sensitive individuals were more likely and victim-sensitive individuals were less likely to support solidarity with countries in need of financial support. These correlations were mediated by affective components of political attitudes, namely nationalistic concerns, resentment about and empathic concerns with debtor countries. In Study 2 (N = 51), using a pre–post within-subjects design, we showed that framing the euro crisis in an ‘exploitation frame” (compared to a ‘solidarity frame’) in news media reports was more likely to trigger nationalistic concerns and, consequently, decrease support of solidarity in victim-sensitive individuals compared to their less victim-sensitive counterparts. These results are in line with the SeMI model and previous findings that victim sensitivity is linked to fear of being exploited in intergroup relations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Given a certain content similarity of JS and political attitude items, we submitted the four items indicating victim and observer sensitivity and the 16 items indicating attitudes to a factor analysis (Varimax rotation), None of the four items measuring justice sensitivity cross-loaded on any of the factors that the attitude items loaded on (cross-loadings between −.04 and .26). Similarly, none of the items measuring attitudes cross-loaded on either observer or victim sensitivity factors (cross-loadings between −.01 and −.24). Factor loadings are presented in Supplementary materials.

  2. To make sure that the statements reflect either the solidarity or the exploitation frame, we conducted a pretest, in which 22 student participants rated them on a number of dimensions. To measure the degree to which each statement reflects the solidarity frame, participants indicated to what extent the statements described the debtor countries as “victims” and Germany as a beneficiary of the euro crisis (“solidarity frame index”). To measure the degree to which each statement reflects the exploitation frame, participants indicated to what degree the statements reflected the idea of Germany as a victim and the debtor countries as “beneficiaries” of the euro crisis (“exploitation frame index”). The responses were given on a 7-point scale ranging from “not at all” to “very much”. The statements used in the exploitation frame in the main study obtained significantly high scores on the exploitation frame index (M = 4.59, SD = 1.44) than on the solidarity frame index (M = 2.60, SD = 1.35, t (21) = 5.27, p < .001). Conversely, the statements used in the solidarity frame in the main study obtained significantly high scores on the solidarity frame index (M = 3.52, SD = 1.32) than on the exploitation frame index (M = 2.39, SD = 0.87, t (21) = −6.84, p < .001).

  3. The free recall task was introduced for other purposes than the goals of the present research. The recall accuracy was unrelated to justice sensitivity. Interested readers can obtain further details directly from the authors.

References

  • Agroskin, D., Jonas, E., & Traut-Mattausch, E. (2014). When suspicious minds go political: Distrusting and justifying the system at the same time. Political Psychology. doi:10.1111/pops.12185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumert, A., Schlösser, T., & Schmitt, M. (2014). Economic games: A performance-based assessment of fairness and altruism. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 30(3), 178–192. doi:10.1027/1015-5759/a000183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beierlein, C., Baumert, A., Schmitt, M., Kemper, C. J., & Rammstedt, B. (2013). Sensibilität für Ungerechtigkeit als sozialwissenschaftliche Prädiktorvariable-Vier Kurzskalen zur Messung dieses Persönlichkeitsmerkmals [Justice sensitivity as a predictor in social science-Four short scales for its measurement]. Methoden, Daten und Analysen, 7, 279–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berinsky, A. J., & Kinder, D. R. (2006). Making sense of issues through media frames: Understanding the Kosovo crisis. Journal of Politics, 68(3), 640–656. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00451.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christ, S. (2015). An die Vollpfosten, die sich an der Anti-Griechenland-Kampagne der “Bild”-Zeitung beteiligen. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from July 22, 2015. http://www.huffingtonpost.de/2015/02/27/griechenland-bild_n_6768052.html.

  • Crawford, J. T., Wiley, S., & Ventresco, N. (2014). Examining Americans’ attitudes toward drone strikes on the eve of the 2012 presidential election. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 14(1), 46–60. doi:10.1111/asap.12030.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Angelo, P. (2012). Studying framing in political communication with an integrative approach. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(3), 353–364. doi:10.1177/0002764211426332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • dapd. (2011). Deutschland kann nicht Zahlmeister sein. Handelsblatt. Retrieved from July 22, 2015. http://www.handelsblatt.com/politik/deutschland/eurokrise-deutschland-kann-nicht-zahlmeister-sein/4396888.html.

  • de Vreese, C. H. (2004). The effects of strategic news on political cynicism, issue evaluations, and policy support: A two-wave experiment. Mass Communication and Society, 7(2), 191–214. doi:10.1207/s15327825mcs0702_4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Decety, J., & Yoder, K. J. (2015). Empathy and motivation for justice: Cognitive empathy and concern, but not emotional empathy, predict sensitivity to injustice for others. Social Neuroscience, 11, 1–14.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Dolan, E. (2011). How Germany free-rides on the Euro. Business Insider. Retrieved from July 22, 2015. http://www.businessinsider.com/how-germany-free-rides-on-the-euro-2011-8?IR=T.

  • Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2015). Financial assistance to Greece. Retrieved from July 22, 2015. http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/assistance_eu_ms/greek_loan_facility/index_en.htm.

  • Faccenda, L., Pantaléon, N., & Reynes, E. (2009). Significant predictors of soccer players’ moral functioning from components of contextual injustice, sensitivity to injustice and moral atmosphere. Social Justice Research, 22(4), 399–415. doi:10.1007/s11211-009-0105-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fetchenhauer, D., & Huang, X. (2004). Justice sensitivity and distributive decisions in experimental games. Personality and Individual Differences, 36(5), 1015–1029. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(03)00197-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler, K., Schott, M., & Meiser, T. (2011). What mediation analysis can (not) do. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(6), 1231–1236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerlach, T. M., Allemand, M., Agroskin, D., & Denissen, J. J. A. (2012). Justice sensitivity and forgiveness in close interpersonal relationships: The mediating role of mistrustful, legitimizing, and pro-relationship cognitions. Journal of Personality, 80(5), 1373–1413. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2012.00762.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, M., & Rothmund, T. (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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, M., Rothmund, T., Pfeiffer, A., & Ensenbach, C. (2009). Why and when justice sensitivity leads to pro- and antisocial behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(6), 999–1005. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2009.07.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, M., Rothmund, T., & Süssenbach, P. (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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, M., Schmitt, M., Schalke, R., Maes, J., & Baer, A. (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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling [White paper]. Retrieved from http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf.

  • John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 102–138). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H. J., & Cameron, G. T. (2011). Emotions matter in crisis: The role of anger and sadness in the publics’ response to crisis news framing and corporate crisis response. Communication Research, 38(6), 826–855. doi:10.1177/0093650210385813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Kleinman, S. B. (2012). Preelection selective exposure: Confirmation bias versus informational utility. Communication Research, 39(2), 170–193. doi:10.1177/0093650211400597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kühne, R., & Schemer, C. (2015). The emotional effects of news frames on information processing and opinion formation. Communication Research, 42(3), 387–407. doi:10.1177/0093650213514599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, M. J., & Lerner, S. C. (1981). The justice motive in social behavior. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lotz, S., Baumert, A., Schlösser, T., Gresser, F., & Fetchenhauer, D. (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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lotz, S., Schlösser, T., Cain, D. M., & Fetchenhauer, D. (2013). The (in)stability of social preferences: Using justice sensitivity to predict when altruism collapses. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 93, 141–148. doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2013.07.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lovaš, L., & Wolt, R. (2002). Sensitivity to injustice in the context of some personality traits. Studia Psychologica, 44(2), 125–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackie, D. M., Devos, T., & Smith, E. R. (2000). Intergroup emotions: Explaining offensive action tendencies in an intergroup context. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(4), 602–616. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.79.4.602.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Matthes, J. (2012). Exposure to counterattitudinal news coverage and the timing of voting decisions. Communication Research, 39(2), 147–169. doi:10.1177/0093650211402322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mikula, G., & Wenzel, M. (2000). Justice and social conflict. International Journal of Psychology, 35(2), 126–135. doi:10.1080/002075900399420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montada, L. (2007). Justice conflicts and the justice of conflict resolution. In K. Törnblom & R. Vermunt (Eds.), Distributive and procedural justice. Research and applications (pp. 255–268). Burlington: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mudde, C. (2016). Europe’s populist surge. Foreign Affairs, 95(6), 25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nabi, R. L. (1999). A cognitive-functional model for the effects of discrete negative emotions on information. Communication Theory, 9(3), 292–320. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.1999.tb00172.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nabi, R. L. (2002). Anger, fear, uncertainty, and attitudes: A test of the cognitive-functional model. Communication Monographs, 69(3), 204–216. doi:10.1080/03637750216541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, T. E., Oxley, Z. M., & Clawson, R. A. (1997). Toward a psychology of framing effects. Political Behavior, 19(3), 221–246. doi:10.1023/A:1024834831093.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, J. E., & Rahn, W. M. (2016). Rise of the trumpenvolk populism in the 2016 election. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 667(1), 189–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramírez, C. Z., & Verkuyten, M. (2011). Values, media framing, and political tolerance for extremist groups. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41(7), 1583–1602. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00775.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rammstedt, B. (2007). The 10-item Big Five inventory: Norm values and investigation of sociodemographic effects based on a German population representative sample. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 23(3), 193–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rammstedt, B., & John, O. P. (2007). Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10-item short version of the Big Five inventory in English and German. Journal of Research in Personality, 41(1), 203–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. http://www.jstatsoft.org/v48/i02/.

  • 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. doi:10.1007/s11211-014-0202-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothmund, T., Gollwitzer, M., & Klimmt, C. (2011). Of virtual victims and victimized virtues: Differential effects of experienced aggression in video games on social cooperation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(1), 107–119. doi:10.1177/0146167210391103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Runciman, W. G. (1966). Relative deprivation and social justice: A study of attitudes to social inequality in twentieth century England. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheufele, D. A., & Tewksbury, D. (2007). Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 9–20. doi:10.1111/j.0021-9916.2007.00326.x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, M. (1996). Individual differences in sensitivity to befallen injustice (SBI). Personality and Individual Differences, 21(1), 3–20. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(96)00028-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, M., Baumert, A., Gollwitzer, M., & Maes, J. (2010). The justice sensitivity inventory: Factorial validity, location in the personality facet space, demographic pattern, and normative data. Social Justice Research, 23(2), 211–238. doi:10.1007/s11211-010-0115-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, M., & Dörfel, M. (1999). Procedural injustice at work, justice sensitivity, job satisfaction and psychosomatic well-being. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29(4), 443–453. doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-0992(199906)29:4<443:aid-ejsp935>3.0.co;2-c.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, M., Gollwitzer, M., Maes, J., & Arbach, D. (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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schönbrodt, F. D., & Perugini, M. (2013). At what sample size do correlations stabilize? Journal of Research in Personality, 47(5), 609–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (1983). Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: Informative and directive functions of affective states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(3), 513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (2003). Mood as information: 20 years later. Psychological Inquiry, 14(3–4), 296–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stavrova, O., & Schlösser, T. (2015). Solidarity and social justice: Effect of individual differences in justice sensitivity on solidarity behaviour. European Journal of Personality, 29(1), 2–16. doi:10.1002/per.1981.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stavrova, O., Schlösser, T., & Baumert, A. (2014). Life satisfaction and job-seeking behavior of the unemployed: The effect of individual differences in justice sensitivity. Applied Psychology, 63(4), 643–670. doi:10.1111/apps.12009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Süssenbach, P., & Gollwitzer, M. (2015). Us(ed): The role of victim sensitivity in potentially exploitative intergroup relationships. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 18(2), 241–255. doi:10.1177/1368430214556700.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Traut-Mattausch, E., Guter, S., Zanna, M., Jonas, E., & Frey, D. (2011). When citizens fight back: Justice sensitivity and resistance to political reform. Social Justice Research, 24(1), 25–42. doi:10.1007/s11211-011-0125-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vohs, K. D., Baumeister, R. F., & Chin, J. (2007). Feeling duped: Emotional, motivational, and cognitive aspects of being exploited by others. Review of General Psychology, 11(2), 127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Koblenz-Landau, Fortstraße 7, 76289, Landau, Germany

    Tobias Rothmund

  2. Institute of Sociology and Social Psychology, University of Cologne, Albertus-Magnus-Platz, 50923, Cologne, Germany

    Olga Stavrova & Thomas Schlösser

  3. Department of Social Psychology, Tilburg University, PO Box 90153, 5000, Tilburg, The Netherlands

    Olga Stavrova

Authors
  1. Tobias Rothmund
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Olga Stavrova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas Schlösser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tobias Rothmund.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there are no potential conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Tobias Rothmund and Olga Stavrova are co-first authors.

Questionnaires, data of both studies and supplementary material can be freely accessed (https://osf.io/sgu5j/).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rothmund, T., Stavrova, O. & Schlösser, T. Justice Concerns Can Feed Nationalistic Concerns and Impede Solidarity in the Euro Crisis: How Victim Sensitivity Translates into Political Attitudes. Soc Just Res 30, 48–71 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-017-0280-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-017-0280-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation