Abstract
The current study aimed to explore the influences of moral emotions, moral ethics and perceptions of the perpetrator on the phenomenon of victim derogation. Based on the assumptions of Lerner’s Just World Belief theory (JWB; Lerner 2002) and Shweder’s “Big Three” ethics theory (Shweder et al. 1997), levels of victim derogation and avoidance in response to vignettes were analyzed as a function of moral content (ethic) and emotions, as well as good or bad outcome and perceptions of the perpetrator. Study 1 examined the influence of moral contents and outcome on moral emotions, finding that disgust is salient in violation of the divinity ethic whereas anger is salient in the autonomy ethic, and that anger is more dependent on outcome than disgust. Study 2 analyzed the influence of moral content, outcome, and perceptions of the perpetrator on victim perception. Results showed that the victim in the divinity context is perceived as more morally positive regardless of the outcome, but is avoided more. Also, negative perception of the perpetrator contributes more to positive perception of the victim in the divinity ethic than in the autonomy ethic. Perception of the victim in the autonomy ethic is affected more by outcome, and, in line with the JWB hypothesis, is derogated more when the outcome is negative. The fundamental motivation of justice was shown to be related to the link between act and outcome, but to vary by moral content. Derogation of the victim as a defense of JWB appears to be a typical reaction to injustice in the autonomy ethic, while avoidance of the victim may characterize violations of the divinity ethic.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Correia, I., Vala, J., & Aguiar, P. (2001). The effects of belief in a just world and victim's innocence on secondary victimization, judgements of justice and deservingness. Social Justice Research, 14(3), 327–342.
Correia, I., Alves, H., Sutton, R., Ramos, M., Gouveia-Pereira, M., & Vala, J. (2012). When do people derogate or psychologically distance themselves from victims? Belief in a just world and ingroup identification. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(6), 747–752.
Cushman, F., Young, L., & Hauser, M. (2006). The role of conscious reasoning and intuition in moral judgment testing three principles of harm. Psychological Science, 17(12), 1082–1089.
Ellard, J. H., Miller, C. D., Baumle, T., & Olson, J. M. (2002). Just world processes in demonizing. In M. Ross & D. T. Miller (Eds.), The justice motive in everyday life (pp. 350–362). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Furnham, A. (2003). Belief in a just world: Research progress over the past decade. Personality and Individual Differences, 34(5), 795–817.
Greene, J. D., Sommerville, R. B., Nystrom, L. E., Darley, J. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science, 293(5537), 2105–2108.
Hafer, C. L., & Bègue, L. (2005). Experimental research on just-world theory: Problems, developments, and future challenges. Psychological Bulletin, 131(1), 128–167.
Haidt, J., & Graham, J. (2007). When morality opposes justice: Conservatives have moral intuitions that liberals may not recognize. Social Justice Research, 20(1), 98–116.
Haidt, J., & Hersh, M. A. (2001). Sexual morality: The cultures and emotions of conservatives and liberals. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31(1), 191–221.
Haidt, J., Koller, S. H., & Dias, M. G. (1993). Affect, culture, and morality, or is it wrong to eat your dog? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(4), 613–628.
Haidt, J., McCauley, C., & Rozin, P. (1994). Individual differences in sensitivity to disgust: A scale sampling seven ethics of disgust elicitors. Personality and Individual Differences, 16(5), 701–713.
Haidt, J., Rozin, P., McCauley, C., & Imada, S. (1997). Body, psyche, and culture: The relationship of disgust to morality. Psychology and Developing Societies, 9, 107–131.
Janoff-Bulman, R., Timko, C., & Carli, L. L. (1985). Cognitive biases in blaming the victim. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21(2), 161–177.
Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33(1), 1–27.
Lerner, M. J. (2002). Justice motivation and moral motivation. In M. Ross & T. D. Miller (Eds.), The justice motive in everyday life (pp. 91–109). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lerner, M. J., & Miller, D. T. (1978). Just world research and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead. Psychological Bulletin, 85(5), 1030–1051.
Lerner, M. J., & Simmons, C. H. (1966). Observer's reaction to the" innocent victim": Compassion or rejection? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4(2), 203.
Mitchell, D., Angelone, D. J., Kohlberger, B., & Hirschman, R. (2009). Effects of offender motivation, victim gender, and participant gender on perceptions of rape victims and offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24(9), 1564–1578.
Niemi, L., & Young, L. (2016). When and why we see victims as responsible the impact of ideology on attitudes toward victims. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1–16.
Pizarro, D. (2000). Nothing more than feelings? The role of emotions in moral judgment. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 30(4), 355–375.
Rozin, P., Lowery, L., Imada, S., & Haidt, J. (1999). The CAD triad hypothesis: A mapping between three moral emotions (contempt, anger, disgust) and three moral codes (community, autonomy, divinity). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(4), 574–586.
Rozin, P., Haidt, J., & McCauley, C. R. (2008). Disgust. In M. Lewis, J. M. Haviland-Jones, & L. F. Barrett (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (3rd ed., pp. 757–776). New York: Guilford Press.
Rubin, Z., & Peplau, A. (1975). Who believes in a just world? Journal of Social Issues, 31(3), 65–89.
Russell, P., & Giner-Sorolla, R. (2011). Moral anger is more flexible than moral disgust. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2, 360–364.
Shweder, R. A. (1990). Ethical relativism: Is there a defensible version? Ethos, 18(2), 205–218.
Shweder, R. A., Much, N. C., Mahapatra, M., & Park, L. (1997). The "big three" of morality (autonomy, community, divinity) and the "big three" explanations of suffering. In A. Brandt & P. Rozin (Eds.), Morality and health (pp. 119–169). New York: Routledge.
Sizemore, O. J. (2013). The role of perpetrator motivation in two crime scenarios. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 28(1), 80–91.
Skitka, L. J. (2009). Exploring the “lost and found” of justice theory and research. Social Justice Research, 22(1), 98–116.
Tepe, B., Piyale, Z. E., Sirin, S., & Sirin, L. R. (2016). Moral decision-making among young Muslim adults on harmless taboo violations: The effects of gender, religiosity, and political affiliation. Personality and Individual Differences, 101, 243–248.
Walsh, B. (2015). The post drops the ‘mike’ – And the hyphen in ‘e-mail’. Washington Post, Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com.
Weiner, B. (1980). A cognitive (attribution)–emotion–action model of motivated behavior: An analysis of judgments of help-giving. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(2), 186–200.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. The authors declare that there are no potential conflicts of interest with respect to 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 institutional and/or national research 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.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tepe, B., Cesur, S. & Sunar, D. Just World Belief and Ethics of Morality: When Do We Derogate the Victim?. Curr Psychol 39, 183–193 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-017-9737-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-017-9737-y