Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Validation of the general and personal belief in a just world scales in Iran and their relations to perceived likelihood of kin favoritism

  • Published:
Current Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

People possess a pre-conscious need to believe in the existence of justice in the world. This belief in a just world (BJW) is usually measured with self-report scales. Dalbert et al., Psychologische Beitrage, 29(4), 596–615 (1987) and Dalbert, Social Justice Research, 12(2), 79–98 (1999) have developed the general belief in a just world (GBJW) and personal belief in a just world (PBJW) scales as psychometrically robust measures of just-world beliefs. We conducted three studies to demonstrate the validity of the Persian versions of belief in a just world scales and the importance of distinguishing between GBJW and PBJW. First, we confirmed the factor structure. reliability, convergent validity (self-esteem, life satisfaction, and religiosity), and divergent validity (big five personality factors and dark triad traits) of GBJW and PBJW using Iranian participants (N1 = 454). Second, the associations of GBJW and PBJW with perceived threat of unjust behavior directed to self or others were assessed using two scenario based studies (N2 = 279, N3 = 292) in the context of kin favoritism. Our finding showed that both GBJW and PBJW negatively predict perceived likelihood of kin favoritism. However, GBJW was a stronger predictor when injustice was directed at others, and PBJW was a stronger predictor when injustice was directed at self. Consistent with previous research and theoretical assumptions, perceived likelihood of punishment mediated these associations.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aghababaei, N., Mohammadtabar, S., & Saffarinia, M. (2014). Dirty dozen vs. the h factor: Comparison of the dark triad and honesty–humility in prosociality, religiosity, and happiness. Personality and Individual Differences, 67, 6–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akbari, M., Bahrami-Rad, D., Kimbrough, E. O., Romero, P. P., & Alhosseini, S. (2020). An experimental study of kin and ethnic favoritism. Economic Inquiry, 58(4), 1795–1812.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ames, D. R., Rose, P., & Anderson, C. P. (2006). The npi-16 as a short measure of narcissism. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(4), 440–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atari, M., & Yaghoubirad, M. (2016). The big five personality dimensions and mental health: The mediating role of alexithymia. Asian Journal of Psychiatry, 24, 59–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bai, B.-Y., Liu, X.-X., & Kou, Y. (2014). Belief in a just world lowers perceived intention of corruption: The mediating role of perceived punishment. PLoS One, 9(5), e97075.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Bai, B.-Y., Liu, X.-X., & Kou, Y. (2016). Belief in a just world lowers bribery intention. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 19(1), 66–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bègue, L. (2002). Beliefs in justice and faith in people: Just world, religiosity and interpersonal trust. Personality and Individual Differences, 32(3), 375–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bollmann, G., Krings, F., Maggiori, C., & Rossier, J. (2015). Differential associations of personal and general just-world beliefs with the five-factor and the hexaco models of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 87, 312–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cubela Adoric, V., & Kvartuc, T. (2007). Effects of mobbing on justice beliefs and adjustment. European Psychologist, 12(4), 261–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalbert, C. (1999). The world is more just for me than generally: About the personal belief in a just world scale’s validity. Social Justice Research, 12(2), 79–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalbert, C., Montada, L., & Schmitt, M. (1987). Glaube an eine gerechte welt als motiv: Validierungskorrelate zweier skalen [Belief in a just world: Validation correlates of two scales]. Psychologische Beitrage, 29(4), 596–615.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Donat, M., Peter, F., Dalbert, C., & Kamble, S. V. (2016). The meaning of students’ personal belief in a just world for positive and negative aspects of school-specific well-being. Social Justice Research, 29(1), 73–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donat, M., Umlauft, S., Dalbert, C., & Kamble, S. V. (2012). Belief in a just world, teacher justice, and bullying behavior. Aggressive Behavior, 38(3), 185–193.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrhart, M. G., Ehrhart, K. H., Roesch, S. C., Chung-Herrera, B. G., Nadler, K., & Bradshaw, K. (2009). Testing the latent factor structure and construct validity of the ten-item personality inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(8), 900–905.

    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 

  • Furnham, A. (2003). Belief in a just world: Research progress over the past decade. Personality and Individual Differences, 34(5), 795–817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gelfand, L. A., Mensinger, J. L., & Tenhave, T. (2009). Mediation analysis: A retrospective snapshot of practice and more recent directions. The Journal of General Psychology, 136(2), 153–178.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B., Jr. (2003). A very brief measure of the big-five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(6), 504–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hafer, C. L., & Gosse, L. (2011). Predicting alternative strategies for preserving a belief in a just world: The case of repressive coping style. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(6), 730–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hafizi, S., Memari, A. H., Pakrah, M., Mohebi, F., Saghazadeh, A., & Koenig, H. G. (2013). The duke university religion index (durel): Validation and reliability of the farsi version. Psychological Reports, 112(1), 151–159.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, A. J., & Callan, M. J. (2014). The role of religiosity in ultimate and immanent justice reasoning. Personality and Individual Differences, 56, 193–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henson, R. K., & Roberts, J. K. (2006). Use of exploratory factor analysis in published research: Common errors and some comment on improved practice. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(3), 393–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonason, P. K., & Webster, G. D. (2010). The dirty dozen: A concise measure of the dark triad. Psychological Assessment, 22(2), 420.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Joshanloo, M., & Afshari, S. (2011). Big five personality traits and self-esteem as predictors of life satisfaction in iranian muslim university students. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12(1), 105–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiral Ucar, G., Hasta, D., & Malatyali, M. K. (2019). The mediating role of perceived control and hopelessness in the relation between personal belief in a just world and life satisfaction. Personality and Individual Differences, 143, 68–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koenig, H., Parkerson, G. R., Jr., & Meador, K. G. (1997). Religion index for psychiatric research. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 154(6), 885–886.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut, T. (2011). Someone to blame: When identifying a victim decreases helping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(4), 748–755.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world. The belief in a just world (pp. 9–30). Springer.

  • Lipkus, I. M., Dalbert, C., & Siegler, I. C. (1996). The importance of distinguishing the belief in a just world for self versus for others: Implications for psychological well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(7), 666–677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Modesto, J. G., Keller, V. N., Saraiva, R. B., & Pilati, R. (2020). Belief in a corrupt world: A cross-cultural mediation model of beliefs about justice, punishment, and corruption. Personality and Individual Differences, 164, 110127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nartova-Bochaver, S., Donat, M., Astanina, N., & Rüprich, C. (2018). Russian adaptations of general and personal belief in a just world scales: Validation and psychometric properties. Social Justice Research, 31(1), 61–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nartova-Bochaver, S., Donat, M., & Rüprich, C. (2019). Subjective well-being from a just-world perspective: A multi-dimensional approach in a student sample. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1739.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Nudelman, G. (2013). The belief in a just world and personality: A meta-analysis. Social Justice Research, 26(2), 105–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nudelman, G., & Otto, K. (2021). Personal belief in a just world and conscientiousness: A meta-analysis, facet-level examination, and mediation model. British Journal of Psychology, 112(1), 92–119.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002). The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(6), 556–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romero, E., Villar, P., Gómez-Fraguela, J. A., & López-Romero, L. (2012). Measuring personality traits with ultra-short scales: A study of the ten item personality inventory (tipi) in a spanish sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(3), 289–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, M. (1965). Rosenberg self-esteem scale (RSE). Acceptance and commitment therapy. Measures Package, 61(52), 18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling and more. Version 0.5–12 (BETA). Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36.

  • Shapurian, R., Hojat, M., & Nayerahmadi, H. (1987). Psychometric characteristics and dimensionality of a persian version of rosenberg self-esteem scale. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 65(1), 27–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7(4), 422–445.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Strelan, P., & Sutton, R. M. (2011). When just-world beliefs promote and when they inhibit forgiveness. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(2), 163–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, R. M., & Douglas, K. M. (2005). Justice for all, or just for me? more evidence of the importance of the self-other distinction in just-world beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences, 39(3), 637–645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tatsi, S., & Panagiotopoulou, P. (2021). Personal and general belief in a just world and self-esteem in primary school students. Current Psychology, 1–10.

  • Transparency International. (2021). Corruption perceptions index 2021. Retrieved from https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2021

  • White, C. J., Norenzayan, A., & Schaller, M. (2019). The content and correlates of belief in karma across cultures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45(8), 1184–1201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, G., Zhao, F., Wang, H., & Li, S. (2020). Subjective social class and distrust among chinese college students: The mediating roles of relative deprivation and belief in a just world. Current Psychology, 39(6), 2221–2230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

    Mehdi Mikani

  2. Department of Psychology, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI, USA

    Parisa Rafiee

  3. Department of Educational Psychology, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Halle/Saale, Germany

    Matthias Donat

Authors
  1. Mehdi Mikani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Parisa Rafiee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Matthias Donat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mehdi Mikani.

Ethics declarations

All applicable international and national ethical guidelines were followed.

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available in OSF, https://osf.io/rdhu5/?view_only=7cb135327e9649559d94ebdfac449633.

The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

Kin Favoritism Scenarios

  1. 1.

    You are a PhD student in one of Iran’s prestigious universities. Your supervisor has been given an opportunity to choose a student to study abroad as a visiting scholar for 6 months. He/she must choose among you and other students under his/her supervision. You are the one with the best GPA and resume but one of the other students is a relative of your supervisor. The supervisor clearly knows that any kind of discrimination is against the university’s rules and regulations.

  2. 2.

    You are a film director and the movie you have recently made is going to be reviewed in an influential film magazine. This week, another movie with a much lower quality is going to be evaluated beside yours, and one of the movies will be chosen and featured as the “best movie of the week”. Various critics work under the supervision of the chief editor of the magazine. Coincidentally, the critic who is in charge of this week’s review process is a relative of the other movie’s director. This critic clearly knows that discrimination and choosing a movie based on anything other than cinematic standards is against the magazine’s rules and regulations.

  3. 3.

    You have taken your lawsuit to a local court. After reviewing the case carefully, your lawyer has assured you that you have the upper hand, and the judge will give a verdict in your favor. Coincidentally, the judge that is assigned to your case is a relative of the other party. All the judges in the courthouse work under the supervision of the Department of Justice. The judge clearly knows that discrimination and giving a verdict based on anything other than the case material is against the law.

  4. 4.

    You have been chosen as one of the two final candidates for a government job position. Considering the resumes, you are clearly better qualified for the job than the other candidate. A recruiter who works under the supervision of higher ranks has to do an interview with you and the other candidate to decide who gets the job. Coincidentally, the recruiter turned out to be a relative of the other candidate. This recruiter knows that discriminating between candidates and not choosing the most qualified person is against the rules.

  5. 5.

    You have had a car accident in a secluded area of the city and both cars have had minimal damage. The other driver is clearly to blame for this accident. A police officer arrives and investigates the scene of the accident. Coincidentally, the officer called for this accident is a relative of the other driver. This police officer clearly knows discrimination for any reason is against the law.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mikani, M., Rafiee, P. & Donat, M. Validation of the general and personal belief in a just world scales in Iran and their relations to perceived likelihood of kin favoritism. Curr Psychol 42, 26286–26299 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03736-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03736-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation