Abstract
This paper focuses on false beliefs that create or maintain injustice, particularly those false beliefs held by the unjustly disadvantaged. Those who benefit from injustice may intentionally lead those disadvantaged by unjust distributions, procedures, or interpersonal treatment to believe that no injustice exists, that the injustice is minimal, or that the injustice that exists cannot be reduced. Research on procedural and interactional justice suggests that perceived injustice is reduced where those affected by a decision have an opportunity to offer an opinion (voice) prior to the decision, and where the decision maker offers a justifying account for the decision. False beliefs in control and dignity may be intentionally created by decision makers to perpetuate their unjust advantage. Suggestions are offered to identify the processes through which fabrications of justice have their effects and the situations in which they are most likely to occur.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bachrach, P., and Baratz, M. S. (1963). Decisions and nondecisions: An analytical framework.Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 57: 632–642.
Bies, R. J., and Shapiro, D. L. (1987). Interactional fairness judgments: The influence of causal accounts.Soc. Justice Res. 1: 199–218.
Buchanan, A., and Mathieu, D. (1986). Philosophy and justice. In Cohen, R. L. (ed.),Justice: Views From the Social Sciences, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 11–45.
Cohen, R. L. (1986). Power and justice in intergroup relations. In Bierhoff, H. W., Cohen, R. L., and Greenberg, J. (eds.),Justice in Social Relations, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 65–84.
Crott, H., Kayser, E., and Lamm, H. (1980). The effects of information exchange and communication in an asymmetrical negotiation situation.Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 10: 149–163.
Fine, M. (1983). The social context and a sense of injustice: The option to challenge.Represent. Res. Soc. Psychol. 13: 15–33.
Fiske, S. T., and Taylor, S. E. (1984).Social Congnition, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Folger, R., Rosenfield, D., and Robinson, T. (1983). Relative deprivation and procedural justification.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 45: 268–273.
Ford, J. B., and Zelditch, M., Jr. (1988). A test of the law of anticipated reactions.Soc. Psychol. Quart. 51: 164–171.
Gamson, W. A., Fireman, B., and Rytina, S. (1982).Encounters With Unjust Authority, Dorsey, Homewood, IL.
Goffman, E. (1974)Frame Analysis, Harper Colophon, New York.
Hillis, J. W., and Wortman, C. B. (1976). Some determinants of public acceptance of randomized control group experimental designs.Sociometry, 39: 91–96.
Hirschman, A. O. (1970).Exit, Voice, and Loyalty, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Hogan, R., and Emler, N. P. (1981). Retributive justice. In Lerner, M. J., and Lerner, S. C. (eds),The Justice Motice in Social Behavior, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 125–143.
Kipnis, D. (1972). Does power corrupt?J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 24: 33–41.
Kipnis, D. (1976).The Powerholders, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Lane, R. E. (1988). Procedural goods in a democracy: How one is treated vs. what one gets.Soc. Justice Res. 2: 177–192.
Langer, E. J. (1975). The illusion of control.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 32: 311–328.
Lerner, M. J. (1980).The Belief in a Just World, Plenum Press, New York.
Leventhal, G. S., and Bergman, J. T. (1969). Self-depriving behavior as a response to unprofitable inequity.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 5: 153–171.
Lewicki, R. (1983). Lying and deception: A behavioral model. In Bazerman, M. H., and Lewicki, R. J. (eds.),Negotiating in Organizations, Sage, Beverly Hills, pp. 68–90.
Liebrand, W. B. G., Messick, D. M., and Wolters, F. J. M. (1986). Why we are fairer than others: A cross-cultural replication and extension.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol., 22: 590–604.
Lind, E. A., Kanfer, R., and Earley, P. C. (1989). Procedural justice and the illusion of process control. Unpublished manuscript, Institute for Civil Justice, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA.
Lind, E. A., and Tyler, T. R. (1988).The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice, Plenum Press, New York.
Lockard, J. S. and Paulhus, D. L. (eds.), (1988).Self-Deception: An Adaptive Mechanism? Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Messick, D. M., and Sentis, K. D. (1983). Fairness, preference, and fairness biases. In Messick, D. M., and Cook, K. S. (eds.),Equity Theory: Sociological and Psychological Approaches, Praeger, New York, pp. 61–94.
Rubin, Z., and Peplau, L. A. (1975). Who believes in a just world?J. Soc. Issues, 31: 65–89.
Simpson, D. (1987).Dead on Arrival, Scribner, New York.
Tajfel, H. (1985). Intergroup relations, social myths, and social justice in social psychology. In Tajfel, H. (ed.),The Social Dimension: European Developments in Social Psychology, Vol. 2, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 695–715.
Taylor, S. E., and Brown, J. D. (1988). Illusion and well-being: A social psychological perspective on mental health.Psychol. Bull. 103: 193–210.
Thibaut, J., and Walker, L. (1978). A theory of procedure.California Law Rev., 66: 541–566.
Tyler, T. R. (1987). Conditions leading to value expressive effects in judgments of procedural justice: A test of four models.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 52: 333–344.
Tyler, T. R. (1988). What is procedural justice? Criteria used by citizens to assess the fairness of legal procedures.Law Soc. Rev. 22: 103–134.
Tyler, T. R., and Bies, R. J. (in press). Beyond formal procedures: The interpersonal context of procedural justice. In Carroll, J. C. (ed.),Applied Social Psychology in Business Organizations, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
Tyler, T. R., Rasinski, K. A., and Griffin, E. (1986). Alternative images of the citizen: Implications for public policy.Am. Psychol. 41: 970–978.
Tyler, T. R., Rasinski, K., and Spodick, N. (1985). The influence of voice on satisfaction with leaders: Exploring the meaning of process control.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 48: 72–81.
Walzer, M. (1983).Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality, Basic Books, New York.
Wortman, C. B., Hendricks, M., and Hillis, J. W. (1976). Factors affecting participant reactions to random assignment in ameliorative social programs.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 33: 256–266.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the meeting of the International Society of Political Psychology, Secaucus, New Jersey, July 1–5, 1988 and at the International Conference on Social Justice and Societal Problems, Leiden, The Netherlands, August 1–3, 1988. Thanks for their coments on earlier drafts to participants at both events, and to three anonymous reviewers forSocial Justice Research.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cohen, R.L. Fabrications of justice. Soc Just Res 3, 31–46 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01050937
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01050937