Chapter 1 Sounding the alarm: Moving from system justification to system condemnation in the justice judgment process

Abstract

Purpose – In this chapter, we seek to resolve the conflicting implications that emerge from status quo theories of justice, on the one hand, and theories of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice on the other. Specifically, status quo theories depict individuals as resistant to perceptions of injustice in their social environments, whereas theories of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice depict individuals as quite sensitive to the justice that characterizes outcomes and treatment.

Methodology/approach – We build on previous research on the justice judgment process to consider ways in which the findings from these two research streams can be integrated.

Findings – We suggest that the two overarching streams of research have identified and empirically explored two distinct modes of justice evaluation: a system justification mode and a system critique mode.

Originality/value of chapter – We develop a model of the justice judgment process that specifies the circumstances under which each of the two modes is likely to operate.

Citation

Plunkett Tost, L. and Allan Lind, E. (2010), "Chapter 1 Sounding the alarm: Moving from system justification to system condemnation in the justice judgment process", Mannix, E.A., Neale, M.A. and Mullen, E. (Ed.) Fairness and Groups (Research on Managing Groups and Teams, Vol. 13), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 3-27. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1534-0856(2010)0000013004