Advertisement

Microjustice and Macrojustice

  • Philip Brickman
  • Robert Folger
  • Erica Goode
  • Yaacov Schul
Part of the Critical Issues in Social Justice book series (CISJ)

Abstract

If every individual in a society has been fairly rewarded, does this guarantee that rewards have been fairly distributed in the society as a whole? Surprisingly, it does not. It is our contention that people use different criteria to assess microjustice (the fairness of rewards to individual recipients) and macrojustice (the aggregate fairness of reward in a society).

Keywords

Procedural Justice Distributive Justice Minimum Principle Outcome Distribution Experimental Social Psychology 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adams, J. S. Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 2. New York: Academic Press, 1965.Google Scholar
  2. American smooths out the bumps. American Way, August 1978, p. 59.Google Scholar
  3. Arrow, K. J. Social choice and individual values. New York: Wiley, 1951.Google Scholar
  4. Brickman, P. Adaptation-level determinants of satisfaction with equal and unequal outcome distributions in skill and chance situations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 32, 191–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brickman, P. Preference for inequality. Sociometry, 1977, 40, 303–310. (a).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brickman, P. Crime and punishment in sports and society. Journal of Social Issues, 1977, 33(1), 140–164. (b)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brickman, P., & Bryan, J. H. Moral judgment of theft, charity, and third-party transfers that increase or decrease equality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 31, 156–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brickman, P., & Bryan, J. H. Equity versus equality as factors in children’s moral judgments of thefts, charity, and third-party transfers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1976, 34, 757–761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brickman, P., & Bulman, R. J. Pleasure and pain in social comparison. In J. Suls & R. Miller (Eds.), Social comparison processes. Washington: Hemisphere, 1977.Google Scholar
  10. Brickman, P., & Campbell, D. T. Hedonic relativism and planning the good society. In M. Appley (Ed.), Adaptation-level theory: A symposium. New York: Academic Press, 1971.Google Scholar
  11. Brickman, P., & Stearns, A. Help that is not called help. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1978, 4, 314–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cohen, R. L. On the distinction between individual deserving and distributive justice. Journal of the Theory of Social Behaviour, 1979, 9, 167–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cole, N. S. Bias in selection. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1973, 10, 237–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Deutsch, M. Equity, equality and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice? Journal of Social Issues, 1975, 31, 137–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eckhoff, T. Justice: Its determinants in social interaction. Rotterdam: Rotterdam University Press, 1974.Google Scholar
  16. Folger, R. Distributive and procedural justice: Combined impact of “voice” and improvement on experienced inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1977, 35, 108–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Folger, R., Rosenfield, D., Grove, J., & Corkran, L. Effects of “voice” and peer opinions on responses to inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1979, 37, 2254–2261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fuchs, V. R. Redefining poverty and redistributing income. The Public Interest, 1967, 8, 89–94.Google Scholar
  19. Goldman, A. H. Justice and reverse discrimination. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1979.Google Scholar
  20. Heilbroner, R. L. An inquiry into the human prospect. New York: W. W. Norton, 1974.Google Scholar
  21. Hofstadter, D. Goedel, Escher, Bach: An eternal golden braid. New York: Basic Books, 1979.Google Scholar
  22. Jaynes, J. The origin of consciousness in the breakdown of the bicameral mind. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1976.Google Scholar
  23. Jemmott, J. B., III, & Tebbets, R. Applying social cognition: A content analysis of the Bakke case. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1980, 6, 30–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kanter, R. M. (Ed.). Communes: Creating and managing the collective life. New York: Harper & Row, 1973.Google Scholar
  25. Langer, E. J. The illusion of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 32, 311–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lerner, M. J. The justice motive in social behavior, journal of Social Issues, 1975, 31, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lerner, M. J., Miller, D. T., & Holmes, J. G. Deserving and the emergence of forms of justice. In L. Berkowitz & E. Walster (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 9. New York: Academic Press, 1976.Google Scholar
  28. Leventhal, G. S. The distribution of rewards and resources in groups and organizations. In L. Berkowitz & E. Walster (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 9. New York: Academic Press, 1976.Google Scholar
  29. Mark, M. M. Justice in the aggregate: The perceived fairness of the distribution of income. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University, 1980.Google Scholar
  30. Modigliani, A., & Gamson, W. A. Thinking about politics. Journal of Political Behavior, Spring, 1979, 1, 5–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nozick, R. Anarchy, state, and Utopia. New York: Basic Books, 1975.Google Scholar
  32. Okun, A. Equality and efficiency: The big trade-off. Washington: Brookings Institute, 1975.Google Scholar
  33. Platt, J. Social traps. American Psychologist, 1973, 28, 641–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rawls, J. A theory of justice. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1971.Google Scholar
  35. Rubin, Z., & Peplau, A. Belief in a just world and reactions to another’s lot: A study of participants in the national draft lottery. Journal of Social Issues, 1973, 29, 73–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Runciman, W. G. Relative deprivation and social justice. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1966.Google Scholar
  37. Sampson, E. E. On justice as equality. Journal of Social Issues, 1975, 31, 45–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Seligman, M. E. P. Helplessness. San Francisco: Freeman, 1975.Google Scholar
  39. Tajfel, H. Differentiation between social groups. London: Academic Press, 1978.Google Scholar
  40. Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. The social psychology of groups. New York: Wiley, 1959.Google Scholar
  41. Thibaut, J. W., & Walker, L. Procedural justice. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1975.Google Scholar
  42. Thorndike, R. L. Concepts of culture fairness. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1971, 8, 63–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Thurow, L. C. The income distribution as a pure public good. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1971, 85, 327–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 1974, 185, 1124–1131.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Walster, E., Walster, G. W., & Berscheid, E. Equity: Theory and research. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1978.Google Scholar
  46. Wortman, C. B. Some determinants of perceived control, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 31, 282–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wortman, C. B., Hendricks, M., & Hillis, J. W. Factors affecting participant reactions to random assignment in ameliorative social programs, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1976, 33, 256–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • Philip Brickman
    • 1
  • Robert Folger
    • 2
  • Erica Goode
    • 3
  • Yaacov Schul
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Psychology and Research Center for Group DynamicsUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  2. 2.Department of PsychologySouthern Methodist UniversityDallasUSA
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyUniversity of California at Santa CruzSanta CruzUSA

Personalised recommendations