Toward a Multifaceted Model of the Structure of Social Justice Judgments
Identifieur interne : 001492 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 001491; suivant : 001493Toward a Multifaceted Model of the Structure of Social Justice Judgments
Auteurs : Clara SabbaghSource :
- Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology [ 0022-0221 ] ; 2005-01.
Abstract
This study explores the potential cross-cultural generalizability of a conceptual framework for understanding the multifaceted universe of contents and structure of human social justice judgments (SJJ). The hypothesized framework identifies four elemental facets needed to define SJJ and specifies the types of justice contents people are likely to distinguish when evaluating the justness of a distribution—principles and distributive rules, social resources, sign of the outcome distribution (positive or negative), and the type of social context in which resources are distributed. To empirically verify the fit between the hypothesized structure, smallest space analysis was applied, and earlier findings obtained in an Israeli sample were compared to findings obtained in East and West German samples. Separate replications conducted in the East and West German samples revealed that the multidimensional configurations of SJJ intercorrelations could be partitioned into distinct regions of items that correspond to the facets’ hypothesized elements and their expected arrangements
Url:
DOI: 10.1177/0022022104271427
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:D67E17619E10194325B5C28E2CF14C434026D320Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Toward a Multifaceted Model of the Structure of Social Justice Judgments</title><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Sabbagh, Clara" sort="Sabbagh, Clara" uniqKey="Sabbagh C" first="Clara" last="Sabbagh">Clara Sabbagh</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Haifa, Israel,</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: csabbagh@construct.haifa.ac.il</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:D67E17619E10194325B5C28E2CF14C434026D320</idno><date when="2005" year="2005">2005</date><idno type="doi">10.1177/0022022104271427</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/D67E17619E10194325B5C28E2CF14C434026D320/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001492</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001492</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Toward a Multifaceted Model of the Structure of Social Justice Judgments</title><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Sabbagh, Clara" sort="Sabbagh, Clara" uniqKey="Sabbagh C" first="Clara" last="Sabbagh">Clara Sabbagh</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Haifa, Israel,</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: csabbagh@construct.haifa.ac.il</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology</title><idno type="ISSN">0022-0221</idno><idno type="eISSN">1552-5422</idno><imprint><publisher>Sage Publications</publisher><pubPlace>Sage CA: Thousand Oaks, CA</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2005-01">2005-01</date><biblScope unit="volume">36</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">1</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="74">74</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="95">95</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0022-0221</idno></series><idno type="istex">D67E17619E10194325B5C28E2CF14C434026D320</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1177/0022022104271427</idno><idno type="ArticleID">10.1177_0022022104271427</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0022-0221</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">This study explores the potential cross-cultural generalizability of a conceptual framework for understanding the multifaceted universe of contents and structure of human social justice judgments (SJJ). The hypothesized framework identifies four elemental facets needed to define SJJ and specifies the types of justice contents people are likely to distinguish when evaluating the justness of a distribution—principles and distributive rules, social resources, sign of the outcome distribution (positive or negative), and the type of social context in which resources are distributed. To empirically verify the fit between the hypothesized structure, smallest space analysis was applied, and earlier findings obtained in an Israeli sample were compared to findings obtained in East and West German samples. Separate replications conducted in the East and West German samples revealed that the multidimensional configurations of SJJ intercorrelations could be partitioned into distinct regions of items that correspond to the facets’ hypothesized elements and their expected arrangements</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>sage</corpusName><author><json:item><name>Clara Sabbagh</name><affiliations><json:string>University of Haifa, Israel,</json:string><json:string>E-mail: csabbagh@construct.haifa.ac.il</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>distributive justice</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>multidimensional scaling</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>cross-cultural</value></json:item></subject><articleId><json:string>10.1177_0022022104271427</json:string></articleId><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>research-article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>This study explores the potential cross-cultural generalizability of a conceptual framework for understanding the multifaceted universe of contents and structure of human social justice judgments (SJJ). The hypothesized framework identifies four elemental facets needed to define SJJ and specifies the types of justice contents people are likely to distinguish when evaluating the justness of a distribution—principles and distributive rules, social resources, sign of the outcome distribution (positive or negative), and the type of social context in which resources are distributed. To empirically verify the fit between the hypothesized structure, smallest space analysis was applied, and earlier findings obtained in an Israeli sample were compared to findings obtained in East and West German samples. Separate replications conducted in the East and West German samples revealed that the multidimensional configurations of SJJ intercorrelations could be partitioned into distinct regions of items that correspond to the facets’ hypothesized elements and their expected arrangements</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>6.8</score><pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>612 x 792 pts (letter)</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractCharCount>1086</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>9594</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>59986</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>22</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>150</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Toward a Multifaceted Model of the Structure of Social Justice Judgments</title><refBibs><json:item><host><author></author><title>Multidimensional similarity structure analysis</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Facet theory: Form and content</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>P. Brickman</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. Folger</name></json:item><json:item><name>E. Goode</name></json:item><json:item><name>Y. Shul</name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>202</last><first>173</first></pages><author></author><title>The justice motive in social behavior</title></host><title>Microjustice and macrojustice</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>C. Burgoyne</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. Swift</name></json:item><json:item><name>G. Marshall</name></json:item></author><host><volume>23</volume><pages><last>342</last><first>327</first></pages><issue>4</issue><author></author><title>Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour</title></host><title>Inconsistency in beliefs about distributive justice: A cautionary note</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>B. Byrne</name></json:item><json:item><name>T. L. Campbell</name></json:item></author><host><volume>30</volume><pages><last>574</last><first>555</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology</title></host><title>Cross-cultural comparisons and the presumption of equivalent measurement and theoretical structure</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Facet theory</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>F. M. Cheng</name></json:item><json:item><name>K. Leung</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. X. Zhang</name></json:item><json:item><name>H. Sun</name></json:item><json:item><name>Y. Gan</name></json:item><json:item><name>W. Song</name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item></author><host><volume>32</volume><pages><last>433</last><first>407</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology</title></host><title>Indigenous Chinese personality constructs</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>R. L. Cohen</name></json:item></author><host><volume>1</volume><pages><last>40</last><first>19</first></pages><issue>1</issue><author></author><title>Social Justice Research</title></host><title>Distributive justice: Theory and research</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>Y. Dar</name></json:item><json:item><name>N. Resh</name></json:item></author><host><volume>31</volume><pages><last>81</last><first>63</first></pages><author></author><title>European Journal of Social Psychology</title></host><title>Exploring the multifaceted structure of sense of deprivation</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Distributive justice</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>In the active voice</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>The division of labor in society</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Justice: Its determinants in social interaction</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Local justice</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Structures of sociallife: The four elementary forms of human relations</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A. P. Fiske</name></json:item><json:item><name>P. E. Tetlock</name></json:item></author><host><volume>18</volume><pages><last>297</last><first>225</first></pages><author></author><title>Political Psychology</title></host><title>Taboo tradeoffs: Reactions to transactions that transgress the spheres of justice</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Societal structures of the mind</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Organizational justice and human resource management</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>S. J. D. Green</name></json:item></author><host><volume>40</volume><pages><last>117</last><first>97</first></pages><author></author><title>British Journalof Sociology</title></host><title>Emile Durkheim on human talents and two traditions of social justice</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J. Greenberg</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. L. Cohen</name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>469</last><first>437</first></pages><author></author><title>Equity and justice in social behavior</title></host><title>Why justice? Normative and instrumental interpretations</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>L. Guttman</name></json:item></author><host><volume>33</volume><pages><last>506</last><first>469</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychometrika</title></host><title>A general non-metric technique for finding the smallest coordinate space for a configuration of points</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Everyday justice</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>K. A. Hegtvedt</name></json:item><json:item><name>B. Markovsky</name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>280</last><first>257</first></pages><author></author><title>Sociological perspectives on social psychology</title></host><title>Justice and injustice</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>What’s fair? American beliefs about distributive justice</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>K. Hurrelmann</name></json:item><json:item><name>C. Palentien</name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>184</last><first>175</first></pages><author></author><title>Politische Kommunikation in Hoerfunk und Fersehen. Elektronische Medien in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland</title></host><title>Politics, communication and media: Youth in Germany</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G. Jasso</name></json:item></author><host><volume>45</volume><pages><last>32</last><first>3</first></pages><author></author><title>American Sociological Review</title></host><title>A new theory of distributive justice</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G. Jasso</name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>387</last><first>354</first></pages><author></author><title>Sociological theories in progress: New formulations</title></host><title>The theory of the distributive-justice force in human affairs: Analyzing the three central questions</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G. Jasso</name></json:item></author><host><volume>5</volume><pages><last>274</last><first>231</first></pages><issue>2</issue><author></author><title>Rationality and Society</title></host><title>Choice and emotion in comparison theory</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G. Jasso</name></json:item></author><host><volume>23</volume><pages><last>406</last><first>368</first></pages><author></author><title>Social Science Research</title></host><title>Assessing individual and group differences in the sense of justice: Framework and application to gender differences in the justice of earnings</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>C. Kagitcibasi</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. W. Berry</name></json:item></author><host><volume>40</volume><pages><last>531</last><first>493</first></pages><author></author><title>Annual Review of Psychology</title></host><title>Cross-cultural psychology: Current research and trends</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>E. Kayser</name></json:item><json:item><name>T. Schwinger</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. L. Cohen</name></json:item></author><host><volume>1</volume><pages><last>458</last><first>433</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Social and Personal Relationships</title></host><title>Laypersons’ conceptions of social relationships: A test of contract theory</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J. Kellerhals</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. Coenen-Huther</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. Modak</name></json:item></author><host><volume>31</volume><pages><last>140</last><first>117</first></pages><author></author><title>Archives-Europeennes-de Sociologie</title></host><title>Justice and the family: An exploratory analysis</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Social justice and political change: Public opinion in capitalist and post-communist States</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J. B. Kruskal</name></json:item></author><host><volume>29</volume><pages><last>27</last><first>1</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychometrika</title></host><title>Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a nonmetric hypothesis</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M. J. Lerner</name></json:item></author><host><volume>31</volume><pages><last>19</last><first>1</first></pages><issue>3</issue><author></author><title>Journal of Social Issues</title></host><title>The justice motive in social behavior: Introduction</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>K. Leung</name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>229</last><first>218</first></pages><author></author><title>The cross-cultural challenge to social psychology</title></host><title>Theoretical advances in justice behavior: Some cross-cultural inputs</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>K. Leung</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. X. Zhang</name></json:item></author><host><volume>20</volume><pages><last>151</last><first>133</first></pages><author></author><title>International Journal of Psychology</title></host><title>Systemic considerations: Factors facilitating and impeding the development of psychology in developing countries</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G. S. Leventhal</name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>55</last><first>27</first></pages><author></author><title>Social exchange: Advances in theory and research</title></host><title>What should be done with equity theory?</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>S. Levy</name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>96</last><first>59</first></pages><author></author><title>Facet theory</title></host><title>Lawful roles of facets in social theories</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>S. Levy</name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>177</last><first>155</first></pages><author></author><title>Operationalization and research strategy</title></host><title>The mapping sentence in cumulative theory construction: Well-being as an example</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>W. J. Lonner</name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>204</last><first>143</first></pages><author></author><title>Handbook of cross-cultural psychology, 1: Perspectives</title></host><title>The search for psychological universals</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>B. F. Meeker</name></json:item><json:item><name>G. C. Elliot</name></json:item></author><host><volume>50</volume><pages><last>15</last><first>7</first></pages><issue>1</issue><author></author><title>Social Psychology Quarterly</title></host><title>Counting the costs: Equity and the allocation of negative group products</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G. Mikula</name></json:item><json:item><name>B. Petri</name></json:item><json:item><name>N. Tanzer</name></json:item></author><host><volume>20</volume><pages><last>149</last><first>133</first></pages><author></author><title>European Journal of Social Psychology</title></host><title>What people regard as unjust: Types and structures of everyday experiences of injustice</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Principles of social justice</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>K. Miller-Loessi</name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>420</last><first>397</first></pages><author></author><title>Sociological perspectives on social psychology</title></host><title>Comparative social psychology: Cross-cultural and cross-national</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J. Mills</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. S. Clark</name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>144</last><first>121</first></pages><author></author><title>Review of personality and social psychology</title></host><title>Exchange and communal relationships</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J. W. Mohr</name></json:item></author><host><volume>24</volume><pages><last>370</last><first>345</first></pages><author></author><title>Annual Review of Sociology</title></host><title>Measuring meaning structures</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>The social system</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>T. Parsons</name></json:item></author><host><volume>29</volume><pages><last>318</last><first>297</first></pages><author></author><title>Harvard Educational Review</title></host><title>The school as a social system: Some of its functions in American society</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Justice</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>A theory of justice</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>H. T. Reis</name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>61</last><first>25</first></pages><author></author><title>The sense of injustice: Social psychological perspectives</title></host><title>The multidimensionality of justice</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>C. Sabbagh</name></json:item><json:item><name>Y. Dar</name></json:item><json:item><name>N. Resh</name></json:item></author><host><volume>57</volume><pages><last>261</last><first>244</first></pages><issue>3</issue><author></author><title>Social Psychology Quarterly</title></host><title>The structure of social justice judgments: A facet approach</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>C. Sabbagh</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. Schmitt</name></json:item></author><host><volume>11</volume><pages><last>395</last><first>381</first></pages><issue>4</issue><author></author><title>Social Justice Research</title></host><title>Exploring the structure of positive and negative justice judgments</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Schmitt, M. (1980).</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M. Schmitt</name></json:item><json:item><name>L. Montada</name></json:item></author><host><volume>13</volume><pages><last>44</last><first>32</first></pages><author></author><title>Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie</title></host><title>Determinants of experienced justice</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>S. H. Schwartz</name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>65</last><first>1</first></pages><author></author><title>Advances in experimental social psychology</title></host><title>Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>S. H. Schwartz</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. Bardi</name></json:item></author><host><volume>32</volume><pages><last>290</last><first>268</first></pages><issue>3</issue><author></author><title>Journalof Cross-Cultural Psychology</title></host><title>Value hierarchies across cultures</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>S. H. Schwartz</name></json:item><json:item><name>G. Melech</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. Lehmann</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. Burgess</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. Harris</name></json:item><json:item><name>V. Owens</name></json:item></author><host><volume>32</volume><pages><last>542</last><first>519</first></pages><issue>5</issue><author></author><title>Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology</title></host><title>Extending the cross-cultural validity of the theory of basic human values with a different method of measurement</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>R. N. Shepard</name></json:item></author><host><volume>39</volume><pages><last>421</last><first>373</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychometrika</title></host><title>Representation of structure in similarity data</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Youth in Saxony</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Social psychology across cultures</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>K. Y. Törnblom</name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>168</last><first>141</first></pages><author></author><title>Advances in group processes</title></host><title>Positive and negative allocations: A typology and a model for conflicting justice principles</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>K. Y. Törnblom</name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>285</last><first>177</first></pages><author></author><title>Justice: Interdisciplinary perspectives</title></host><title>The social psychology of distributive justice</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>K. Y. Törnblom</name></json:item><json:item><name>U. G. Foa</name></json:item></author><host><volume>26</volume><pages><last>173</last><first>161</first></pages><issue>2</issue><author></author><title>Acta Sociologica</title></host><title>Choice of a distribution principle: Crosscultural evidence on the effects of resources</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>K. Y. Törnblom</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. R. Jonsson</name></json:item></author><host><volume>48</volume><pages><last>261</last><first>249</first></pages><issue>3</issue><author></author><title>Social Psychology Quarterly</title></host><title>Subrules of the equality and contribution principles: Their perceived fairness in distribution and retribution</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>K. Y. Törnblom</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. M. Muehlhausen</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. R. Jonsson</name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>99</last><first>59</first></pages><author></author><title>Social justice in human relations: Societal and psychological origins of justice</title></host><title>The allocation of positive and negative outcomes: When is the equality principle fair for both?</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A. Tversky</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. Kahneman</name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>94</last><first>67</first></pages><author></author><title>Rational choice: The contrast between economics and psychology</title></host><title>Rational choice and the framing of decisions</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Social justice in a diverse society</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>F. van de Vijver</name></json:item><json:item><name>K. Leung</name></json:item></author><host><volume>31</volume><pages><last>51</last><first>35</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology</title></host><title>Methodological issues in psychological research on culture</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Spheres of justice</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M. Weber</name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item></author><host><author></author><title>From Max Weber: Essays in sociology</title></host><title>Class, status, and party</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>F. W. Young</name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item><json:item><name> </name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>469</last><first>440</first></pages><author></author><title>Research methods for multimode data analysis</title></host><title>The general Euclidian model</title></json:item></refBibs><genre><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre><host><volume>36</volume><publisherId><json:string>JCC</json:string></publisherId><pages><last>95</last><first>74</first></pages><issn><json:string>0022-0221</json:string></issn><issue>1</issue><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><eissn><json:string>1552-5422</json:string></eissn><title>Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology</title></host><categories><wos><json:string>social science</json:string><json:string>psychology, social</json:string></wos><scienceMetrix><json:string>health sciences</json:string><json:string>psychology & cognitive sciences</json:string><json:string>social psychology</json:string></scienceMetrix></categories><publicationDate>2005</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2005</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1177/0022022104271427</json:string></doi><id>D67E17619E10194325B5C28E2CF14C434026D320</id><score>0.015715938</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/D67E17619E10194325B5C28E2CF14C434026D320/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/D67E17619E10194325B5C28E2CF14C434026D320/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/D67E17619E10194325B5C28E2CF14C434026D320/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Toward a Multifaceted Model of the Structure of Social Justice Judgments</title><title level="a" type="sub" xml:lang="en">Initial Explorations in Israel and Germany</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Sage Publications</publisher><pubPlace>Sage CA: Thousand Oaks, CA</pubPlace><availability><p>SAGE</p></availability><date>2005</date></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Toward a Multifaceted Model of the Structure of Social Justice Judgments</title><title level="a" type="sub" xml:lang="en">Initial Explorations in Israel and Germany</title><author xml:id="author-1"><persName><forename type="first">Clara</forename><surname>Sabbagh</surname></persName><email>csabbagh@construct.haifa.ac.il</email><affiliation>University of Haifa, Israel,</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology</title><idno type="pISSN">0022-0221</idno><idno type="eISSN">1552-5422</idno><imprint><publisher>Sage Publications</publisher><pubPlace>Sage CA: Thousand Oaks, CA</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2005-01"></date><biblScope unit="volume">36</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">1</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="74">74</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="95">95</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">D67E17619E10194325B5C28E2CF14C434026D320</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1177/0022022104271427</idno><idno type="ArticleID">10.1177_0022022104271427</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>2005</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>This study explores the potential cross-cultural generalizability of a conceptual framework for understanding the multifaceted universe of contents and structure of human social justice judgments (SJJ). The hypothesized framework identifies four elemental facets needed to define SJJ and specifies the types of justice contents people are likely to distinguish when evaluating the justness of a distribution—principles and distributive rules, social resources, sign of the outcome distribution (positive or negative), and the type of social context in which resources are distributed. To empirically verify the fit between the hypothesized structure, smallest space analysis was applied, and earlier findings obtained in an Israeli sample were compared to findings obtained in East and West German samples. Separate replications conducted in the East and West German samples revealed that the multidimensional configurations of SJJ intercorrelations could be partitioned into distinct regions of items that correspond to the facets’ hypothesized elements and their expected arrangements</p></abstract><textClass><keywords scheme="keyword"><list><head>keywords</head><item><term>distributive justice</term></item><item><term>multidimensional scaling</term></item><item><term>cross-cultural</term></item></list></keywords></textClass></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="2005-01">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/D67E17619E10194325B5C28E2CF14C434026D320/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="corpus sage not found" wicri:toSee="no header"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:docType PUBLIC="-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v2.3 20070202//EN" URI="journalpublishing.dtd" name="istex:docType"></istex:docType><istex:document><article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="2.3" xml:lang="EN"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="hwp">spjcc</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">JCC</journal-id><journal-title>Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology</journal-title><issn pub-type="ppub">0022-0221</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Sage Publications</publisher-name><publisher-loc>Sage CA: Thousand Oaks, CA</publisher-loc></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1177/0022022104271427</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">10.1177_0022022104271427</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Toward a Multifaceted Model of the Structure of Social Justice Judgments</article-title><subtitle>Initial Explorations in Israel and Germany</subtitle></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Sabbagh</surname><given-names>Clara</given-names></name><aff>University of Haifa, Israel, <email xlink:type="simple">csabbagh@construct.haifa.ac.il</email></aff></contrib></contrib-group><pub-date pub-type="ppub"><month>01</month><year>2005</year></pub-date><volume>36</volume><issue>1</issue><fpage>74</fpage><lpage>95</lpage><abstract><p>This study explores the potential cross-cultural generalizability of a conceptual framework for understanding the multifaceted universe of contents and structure of human social justice judgments (SJJ). The hypothesized framework identifies four elemental facets needed to define SJJ and specifies the types of justice contents people are likely to distinguish when evaluating the justness of a distribution—principles and distributive rules, social resources, sign of the outcome distribution (positive or negative), and the type of social context in which resources are distributed. To empirically verify the fit between the hypothesized structure, smallest space analysis was applied, and earlier findings obtained in an Israeli sample were compared to findings obtained in East and West German samples. Separate replications conducted in the East and West German samples revealed that the multidimensional configurations of SJJ intercorrelations could be partitioned into distinct regions of items that correspond to the facets’ hypothesized elements and their expected arrangements</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>distributive justice</kwd><kwd>multidimensional scaling</kwd><kwd>cross-cultural</kwd></kwd-group><custom-meta-wrap><custom-meta xlink:type="simple"><meta-name>sagemeta-type</meta-name><meta-value>Journal Article</meta-value></custom-meta><custom-meta xlink:type="simple"><meta-name>search-text</meta-name><meta-value> 10.1177/0022022104271427JOURNAL OF CROSS-CULTURAL PSYCHOLOGYSabbagh / STRUCTURE OF SOCIAL JUSTICE JUDGMENTS TOWARD A MULTIFACETED MODEL OF THE STRUCTURE OF SOCIAL JUSTICE JUDGMENTS Initial Explorations in Israel and Germany CLARA SABBAGH University of Haifa, Israel This study explores the potential cross-cultural generalizability of a conceptual framework for understand- ing the multifaceted universe of contents and structure of human social justice judgments (SJJ). The hypoth- esized framework identifies four elemental facets needed to define SJJ and specifies the types of justice con- tents people are likely to distinguish when evaluating the justness of a distribution--principles and distributive rules, social resources, sign of the outcome distribution (positive or negative), and the type of social context in which resources are distributed. To empirically verify the fit between the hypothesized structure, smallest space analysis was applied, and earlier findings obtained in an Israeli sample were com- paredtofindingsobtainedinEast andWest Germansamples.SeparatereplicationsconductedintheEast and West German samples revealed that the multidimensional configurations of SJJ intercorrelations could be partitioned into distinct regions of items that correspond to the facets' hypothesized elements and their expected arrangements. Keywords: distributive justice; multidimensional scaling; cross-cultural It is an undeniable fact that justice has many facets, depending on the theses of the contending parties. For thousands of years, in public conflicts and in private ones, in wars and in revolutions, in lawsuits and in clashes of interest, antagonists have declared and attempted to prove that justice was on their side. And so the notion seems inextricably confused. Our first task must thus be to analyze scientifically the concept of justice. This, like a prism which breaks down white light into its elements, will permit us to distinguish the variety of its meanings and uses. Perelman (1967, pp. 5-6) Chaim Perelman's metaphor of the prism-like concept of justice aptly reflects the purpose of the current study, which is to develop, and attempt to empirically verify, a conceptualiza- tion of the multifaceted nature of social justice judgments (hereafter, SJJ; Cohen, 1987; Deutsch, 1985).1 This conceptualization aims at modeling human SJJ through identification of a generalized structural logic that may be useful to psychologists in accounting for observed common patterns in justice perception across diverse cultural contexts, as well as 74 AUTHOR'S NOTE:This research was supportedbythe National CouncilofJewish Women(NCJW)Institute forInnovation in Edu- cation at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, the Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst (DAAD), the Israel Foundations Trust- ees, and the Center for Human Rights in Israel. I am grateful to Yechezkel Dar, Klaus Hurrelmann, Nura Resh, and Manfred Schmitt for their continuous support and for gathering the data on which this article is based. Lawrence A. Powell contributed with insightful comments and invaluable assistance, and Helene Hogri with editorial work. An earlier version of this article was presented at the Seventh Biennial Meeting of the International Society for Social Justice Research, Denver, Colorado, May 1998, and at the Fifth International Conference on Logic and Methodology (RC33), October 2000, Cologne, Germany. Address all correspondence con- cerning this article to Clara Sabbagh at csabbagh@construct.haifa.ac.il. JOURNAL OF CROSS-CULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY, Vol. 36 No. 1, January 2005 74-95 DOI: 10.1177/0022022104271427 © 2005 Sage Publications specific cultural variations on those patterns (Lonner, 1980; Mohr, 1998). Rather than focus- ing on the phenomenology of SJJ, or on how strongly particular social justice opinions are endorsed within national samples,2 the current research examined how individuals organize and integrate their understanding of social justice. The focus is on the structure of interrela- tions among SJJ, according to a set of facets (conceptual dimensions or classifications), and whether convergence can be found in the observed patterns of these interrelations across two exemplary cultural contexts, Israel and Germany (Borg & Shye, 1995; Canter, 1985). Proceeding from the assumption that individuals in all human cultures in some way dis- tinguish among classes of principles or rules, classes of social resources, expected out- comes, and social contexts when they evaluate the justice of societal transactions,3 this study asked, What role do these identifiable SJJ facets play within the larger system of SJJ mean- ings? How are the different facets of SJJ related to one another, that is, to what extent are they independent or dependent in terms of semanticmeaning? What istheir relative importance in determining SJJ contents? In this context, the meaning of a SJJ can be seen to be reflected in its pattern of empirical associations with other SJJ and can, therefore, be inferred from its embedded location within the overall structure of interrelations among all SJJ (Schwartz, 1992). This type of structure-oriented exploration of SJJ patterns across cultures enables identification of the fundamental psychological and social processes involved, and compari- son of the magnitudes of SSJ (e.g., level of preference for equality) in diverse societies (Kagitcibasi & Berry, 1989; Miller-Loessi, 1995; Smith & Bond, 1993; van de Vijver & Leung, 1997; van de Vijver & Leung, 2000). (For an example of this research approach as applied in the domain of values, see Schwartz, 1992). The multiprinciple approach in justice research conceives of social justice as a multidi- mensional and particularistic phenomenon. There are assumed to be several identifiable archetypal justice principles that humans apply separately or in combination whenever they contemplate distributing different classes of resources (Törnblom & Foa, 1983) in different social contexts (Deutsch, 1985; Lerner, 1975; Leventhal, 1980). Drawing on this approach, Sabbagh and colleagues (Sabbagh, Dar, & Resh, 1994) initially proposed a two-faceted sys- tem for mapping SJJ contents and for understanding how different classes of SJJ are related to each other (structure). The first facet classifies SJJ into a set of distributive principles and rules that regulate distribution (e.g., effort, need); the second facet, into a set of social resources that specify the objects of distribution (e.g., prestige, money). The authors then conducted a nonmetric multidimensional scaling analysis on the SJJ of Israeli adolescents in a national sample to empirically verify the fit between the hypothesized conceptual structure and the actual configuration of people's SJJ. In this analysis, each SJJ item was located in a multidimensional space in a manner that represented the proximity between the items. Results indicated that the configuration of SJJ interrelations formed separate regions that roughly corresponded to the hypothesized a priori arrangements of rules and resources. The current study adds to this a further cross-cultural test of the generalizability of the earlier-derived model, attempting to replicate the structure of SJJ obtained in Israel in another context, Germany, which differs substantially in terms of language, religion, and so on. The validity of this structural model is further examined by considering negative out- come distributions as well as positive ones, and by analyzing SJJ gleaned from more than one measure. In addition to testing the initialIsrael-derived model's generalizability, the cur- rent study incorporated two new facets into the definition of SJJ, thereby looking at the mul- tifaceted domain of SJJ in a more comprehensive and integrated way. Additional facets con- sidered within this amended conceptual model are the valence of the resource, and the type of social context in which resources are allocated. Sabbagh / STRUCTURE OF SOCIAL JUSTICE JUDGMENTS 75 FOUR ELEMENTAL FACETS OF HUMAN SOCIAL JUSTICE JUDGMENTS THE STEM FACET OF SJJ Facet A: Justice principles and distributive rules. The first facet in the definition of SJJ is the classification as normative patterns, or types of distributive principles and rules, that ought to regulate resource distribution among persons and groups in society (Reis, 1984). This facet is a primary classifier of SJJ (hereafter, stem facet) as it reflects the basic nature of distributive justice; it specifies substantive solutions to distribution problems. Moreover, it endows the range of SJJ with its meaning because only by specifying distributive principles and rules can individuals or groups express the degree of justness (e.g., from very unjust to very just) of resource distribution. Without specification of principles and rules of justice, social justice judgments would be substantively empty. In their 1994 study, Sabbagh and colleagues specified six distributive rules that previous research had indicated people distinguish under ordinary circumstances: arithmetic equality (a1), equality of opportunities (grouped as equality)(a2); primary and secondary needs (grouped as need) (a3); effort (a4), contribution to society (a5) and ability (grouped as equity) (a6) (Törnblom, 1992). Sabbagh etal. (1994) classified these rules in terms of a series of conceptual attributes, suggesting that they not only are qualitatively different but also can be ordered according to a shared dimension of differentiation. Thus, a hierarchy of rules is established in which each type involves an increment in the level of differentiation it pro- motes. Accordingly, arithmetic equality (a1) is assigned lowest differentiation, as it is a macro-justice rule that explicitly constrains the overall distribution outcome to equal form and disregards personal traits (e.g., age, gender) or performance as bases for granting the resource (Brickman, Folger, Goode, & Shul, 1981; Eckhoff, 1974). This emphasis on recipi- ents' common traits implies that distribution is motivated by collective rather than personal considerations. It also leads to symmetrical relationships in which status differences among recipients are neutralized (Reis, 1984). Finally, as this rule's underlying assumption is that individuals have the same moral value, it demands consideration of learned moral character- istics rather than innate (more differentiating) ones (Perelman, 1967; Rawls, 1971). In con- trast, the rule of ability is assigned highest differentiation because it is a micro-justice rule that seeks to grant justice at the individual level through consideration of personal traits and (implied) performance. It thus leads to asymmetrical relationships in which status differ- ences among recipients are maintained or reinforced and motivated by self-interest. Finally, as ability grants resources based on innate talents, which are naturally determined and beyond individual control, it has a high differentiating meaning (Green, 1988). All other rules are ranged between these two extremes of lowest and highest differentia- tion in a simplex scale. Equality of opportunities (a2) shares most attributes with arithmetic equality; however, it promotes more differentiation because it is a micro-justice rule that grants justice at the individual level and does not constrain the distribution outcome to an equal form. In comparison to equality, the need rules (a3) involve an increment in the amount of differentiation because they also consider personal traits as bases for granting the resource (Eckhoff, 1974). Yet they are less differentiating than equity rules because distribution is not contingent on performance or any other base that leads to, or maintains, status differences among recipients (Reis, 1984). Moreover, as the need rules demand that individuals sacrifice their own interests to provide for the basic needs of others, distribution is motivated by 76 JOURNAL OF CROSS-CULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY collective rather than personal (differentiating) considerations. The rules of effort (a4) and contribution to society (a5) are scored high on the differentiation scale because they share most attributes with ability. Yet effort is less differentiating than contribution and ability, as resource allocation is based on one's willingness to make sacrifices, which demands a rather high moral responsibility that can be reached by anyone, rather than performance. Finally, contribution is less differentiating than ability because it implies performance based on perseverance in the cultivation and application of talent rather than innate talent itself (Green, 1988). THE MODIFYING FACETS OF SJJ Facet B: Classes of social resources. Further specification of SJJ suggests a facet that des- ignates what is to be distributed, that is, classes of social resources. Thus, distributive rules are perceived as just or unjust relative to the resource at stake (Foa & Foa, 1974; Schmitt & Montada, 1982; Törnblom & Foa, 1983; Walzer, 1983). Moreover, as the distinctionbetween resource classes is a function of their combination with distributive rules, they modify Facet A. Elaborating on classical (Weber, 1947) and contemporary theories of resource exchange in social systems (Foa & Foa, 1974; Parsons, 1951), Sabbagh and colleagues (Sabbagh et al., 1994) suggested that a common classification scheme in society is whether distribution per- tains to prestige (b1), influence (b2), learning opportunities (b3), or money (b4).4 These resources can be ordered along a dimension of particularism and convertibility, which indi- cates the extent that the value of a given resource is person and context bound and contingent on its conversion to desiderata. Prestige (b1), the most particularistic and least convertible resource, is atone extreme of this dimension. Its value depends on the persons involved in the distribution and is therefore difficult to convert into other assets. Power (b2) is less particularistic than prestige, but more particularistic than learning opportunities (b3). Money (b4), the least particularistic and most convertible resource, is located at the other extreme. Retaining its value regardless of the context and persons involved in the distribution, it is easily converted. Facet C: Valence of the resource. When a specific class of resource is being distributed, we can assign it a positive (c1) or negative (c2) valence according to its expected outcomes (Törnblom, 1988). In other words, social resources are not neutral. For instance, money is assigned a positive valence when distributing earnings and a negative one when distributing losses or collecting taxes. The valence of a resource is subjectively evaluated, or framed, by the observer as a good or a bad (Jasso, 1994). Nonetheless, these evaluations are usually socially shared; that is, most observers consider earnings a "good" and imprisonment (lack of freedom) a "bad." Historically, distributive justice research focused its attention on the distribution of posi- tive resources, assuming that the understanding of that domain also applies to the distribu- tion of negative resources. Contemporary treatment of distributive justice has challenged that assumption, however, suggesting that SJJ pertaining to positive and negative resources may involve distinct processes (Folger & Copanzano, 1998; Jasso, 1993; Meeker & Elliot, 1987). Thus, several scholars have called for examination of SJJ within a unified framework that makes it possible to systematically examine similarities and differences between positive and negative SJJ (Törnblom, 1988). Sabbagh / STRUCTURE OF SOCIAL JUSTICE JUDGMENTS 77 Research into the core question of the symmetry (or asymmetry) of positive and negative SJJ has suggested that the application of distributive principles and rules varies directly, or through mediation of resource class, with the resource's sign of outcome (Törnblom, Muehlhausen, & Jonsson, 1991). Moreover, the emotional style of expressing responses to just (or unjust) distribution may be affected by the valence of the resource (Jasso, 1993). In this context, several studies have suggested that people are less discriminating in their choice of distributive rules in negative outcome distributions than in positive ones (Meeker & Elliot, 1987). This pattern reflects the centrality and high emotional intensity of negative experi- ences. We may thus presume that resource valence is a constitutive component in structuring SJJ; that is, it is an additional facet that classifies SJJ into positive (c1) and negative (c2) (Sabbagh & Schmitt, 1998). This facet is related to distributive principles and rules (Facet A) and to classes of social resources (Facet B). First, the principles or rules applied may vary according to resource valence (e.g., equity for monetary profits and equality for losses). Thus, Facet C modifies the elements of Facet A. Second, the distinction between positive (c1) and negative (c2) out- comes always pertains to the resource that is being distributed; without specification of resource class, the distinction between positive and negative is devoid of meaning (Sabbagh & Schmitt, 1998; Törnblom & Jonsson, 1985). Hence, Facet C also modifies the elements of Facet B. Facet D: Social contexts. The facet of social contexts (Facet D), which refers here to the institutional system of roles and social arrangements (e.g., workplace, schools, family) that pattern behavior to advance desired social aims (Parsons, 1951), denotes the location of resource distribution. The type of social context in which distribution takes place has been regarded, especially within the multiprinciple justice approach, as an essential and imma- nent component in structuring SJJ (Deutsch, 1985; Douglas, 1982; Fiske, 1991; Fiske & Tetlock, 1997; Greenberg & Cohen, 1982; Kayser, Schwinger, & Cohen, 1984; Lerner, 1975). Accordingly, the validity of justice principles is determined by their compatibility with the specific social context within which they are applied. More specifically, the extent of social solidarity characterizing relations within a specific context is a major dimension that distinguishes among SJJ (Hamilton & Sanders, 1992; Kellerhals, Coenen-Huther, & Modak, 1990; Miller, 1999). Thus, SJJ can be classified into those applied within contexts involving weaker solidarity (d1) and those entailing stronger solidarity (d2). Weaker solidarity contexts, such as economic and competitive ones, are characterized by exchange relations that are limited, temporary, changeable, and coupled with a perception of distance between individual and other (Mills & Clark, 1982). Namely, one perceives others as performers of certain social roles (e.g., a doctor or lawyer) that are evaluated according to uniform and impersonal universal standards (Parsons, 1951). In this type of context, com- munal goals are defined in terms of efficiency and group productivity, requiring a rational and instrumental approach (Deutsch, 1985). Moreover, relations are competitive; that is, individuals try to attain (or maintain) a certain resource at the expense of others; they have conflicting (or noncorrespondent) interests and a low level of interdependence (Durkheim, 1893/1933). Accordingly, the call for justice in weaker solidarity contexts is addressed by the equity principle, as this principle preserves high motivation and performance through an impersonal attitude that evaluates individuals according to their relative efforts and contribution (e.g., Deutsch, 1985; Fiske, 1991; Kellerhals et al., 1990). In contrast, stronger solidarity contexts, such as educational and nurturing or familial ones, enhance relations of personal attachment and identification that are diffuse, stable, 78 JOURNAL OF CROSS-CULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY unique, and unchangeable (Mills & Clark, 1982; Parsons, 1951). The participants in these relations share a common collective identity based on their social bonds (Durkheim, 1893/ 1933); they jointly cooperate to further interpersonal harmony (welfare to all participants) and personal growth (concern with the unique, innate value of the other; Deutsch, 1985). Accordingly, equality and need rules are applied in stronger solidarity contexts because they minimize interpersonal competition and enhance the welfare of others (e.g., Deutsch, 1985; Fiske, 1991; Kellerhals et al., 1990). In sum, the distinction between social contexts according to the dimension of social soli- darity enhances our understanding of the ways in which justice principles and rules are dif- ferentially applied; that is, Facet D modifies Facet A. We may thus expect individuals to dis- tinguish between weaker and stronger solidarity contexts when they consider the justness of resource distribution. MAPPING SENTENCE AND STRUCTURAL HYPOTHESIS The definitional framework outlined above suggests that individuals will conceive of dis- tributive justice as an integrated cognitive scheme, structured by four constitutive compo- nents: distributive principles and rules, resource classes, resource valence, and social con- texts in which distribution takes place. These four facets jointly characterize the multifaceted domain of SJJ contents. To spell out the contents and relations among SJJ facets, I employed a mapping sentence that maps the four facets into a common range on which SJJ are assessed (Table 1).6 If the mapping sentence adequately maps the definition of SJJ contents, then we can describe a specific SJJ domain by combining one element from each facet of the sen- tence. The product of FacetsA, B, C and D (6 Rules × 4 Resources × 2 Valences × 2 Contexts) generates a domain setof 96 possible SJJ. Thus, SJJ itemscan be seen as samples drawn from this domain set, each representing a different combination of type of distributive rule, resource class, resource valence, and context (according to the a priori facet classifications). Moreover, these facet characteristics of SJJ items are taken as definitions that prove useful in organizing empirical data (Borg & Shye, 1995). The proposition concerning the four-faceted structure of SJJ is formulated by means of a structural hypothesis in which the facets, and their correspondent elements, are visually rep- resented in a multidimensional configuration of SJJ intercorrelations. In other words, we can expect this SJJ space to be simultaneously divisible into regions representing the different (a) distributive rules and principles, (b) resource classes, (c) resource valences, (d) social con- texts, and their respective expected arrangements (see Levy, 1990, pp. 161-163). To examine the correspondence between the mapping sentence of SJJ and the empirical structure of its observations, smallest space analysis (SSA), a nonmetric multidimensional scaling method, was applied to the observed responses of SJJ (Borg & Lingoes, 1987; Guttman, 1968). The SSA provides a geometrical configuration that optimally fits the empirical correlations among the SJJ items. Each item is then represented as a point in a mul- tidimensional Euclidean space. The higher the correlation between any two items, the closer the points representing those items (Kruskal, 1964; Shepard, 1974; Young, 1984). To repre- sent the matrix of intercorrelations, one chooses a space with the smallestpossible number of dimensions. Given such a space, one then attempts to partition SSA plane projections into meaningful regions according to the a priori SJJ facets and their elements (Levy, 1985). If the empirical findings on SJJ are consistent with the theory, then partition lines should divide the planes into regions that correspond to the predicted configurations for different types of Sabbagh / STRUCTURE OF SOCIAL JUSTICE JUDGMENTS 79 justice principles and rules, resource classes, resource valences, and social contexts. If they cannot be adequately mapped, or if the configurations cannot be duplicated using different samples, and measures, then the hypothesized structure will be shown to be lacking. STUDY 1 (FIRST REPLICATION)--EAST GERMAN ADOLESCENTS METHOD The Dar and Resh Inventory (Sabbagh et al., 1994) is a set of 16 SJJ items intended to rep- resent each combination of a distributive rule (Facet A) with each class of resource (Facet B). The facets of resource valence (C) and social context (D) are held constant--i.e., SJJ refer only to positive outcome distributions (c1) in society (d1). Table 2 lists the items, each 80 JOURNAL OF CROSS-CULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY TABLE 1 Mapping Sentence for Defining Social Justice Judgments A Justice Judgment Refers to Participant (x)'s Evaluation, or Belief, Regarding the Consideration That Ought To Be Given to Facet A Justice Principles and Distributive Rules (p1 Equality ) (a1 Arithmetic equality ) (p2 Need ) (a2 Equality of results ) in the distribution of (p3 Equity ) (a3 Equality of opportunities ) (a4 Primary needs ) (a5 Secondary needs ) (a6 Effort ) (a7 Contribution ) (a8 Ability ) Facet B Facet C Classes of Social Resources Resource Valence (b1 Prestige (symbolic) ) assign a (c1 Positive ) value, (b2 Power ) (c2 Negative ) (b3 Learning opportunities ) (b4 Money (material) ) Facet D Social Contexts and distributed in a (d1 Economic and competitive ) context, (d2 Educational and nurturing ) Response Range (1 Very unjust ) and ranked by a distribution judgment of (2 Unjust ) . (3 More unjust than just ) (4 More just than unjust ) (5 Just ) (6 Very just ) classified by its correspondent facet elements according to the a priori definition in the map- ping sentence. For each item, respondents were asked, "To what extent should each of the following considerations be taken into account regarding the distribution of . . . ". Each SJJ item is rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (it should not be considered at all) to 5 (it should be considered very much). The inventory was administered to a representative sample of 3,331 respondents age 14 to 22 years (average age = 16.4 years, SD = 1.49) in the State of Lower Saxony in 1992, after the reunification of Germany. The gender distribution was 56% male respondents and 44% female respondents (for a detailed description see Siebenhuener, 1993).7 The matrix of cor- relation coefficients was calculated for the 16 SJJ items, and SSA was applied. RESULTS Figures 1a and 1b display the intercorrelations among the 16 SJJ, which were mapped into distances of a Euclidean space using SSA. Four dimensions were required to adequately summarize the relations among the variables and obtain a close correspondence between the facet design and the space diagram regions. The value of Guttman's (1968) coefficient of alienation was .06. This coefficient measures the goodness of fit between the derived config- uration and the correlation matrix of SJJ. In this case, the lower value indicated a very good fit. The distributive principles and rules facet (A), which is represented in a two-dimensional projection spanned by Axes 1 and 2 of the SSA configuration, is orthogonal to the facet of Sabbagh / STRUCTURE OF SOCIAL JUSTICE JUDGMENTS 81 TABLE 2 Dar and Resh's Social Justice Judgments Inventory Classified by Facets # Item Content Facet Profile a Money 1 Distribution of money should be as equal as possible. a1b4c1d1 2 People in greater need should receive more money. a3b4c1d1 3 Those who invest more should receive more money. a4b4c1d1 4 People who contribute more should receive more money. a5b4c1d1 Prestige 5 Everyone should be given equal honor. a1b1c1d1 6 Devoted and industrious people should be given more honor. a4b1c1d1 7 People who contribute more should be given more honor. a5b1c1d1 Power 8 Everyone should be given an equal chance to be influential. a2b2c1d1 9 Weaker people should be given more of an opportunity to speak out. a3b2c1d1 10 Honest and moral people should have more influence. a4b2c1d1 11 People with expertise and talent should have more influence. a6b2c1d1 Learning opportunities 12 Everyone should have an equal opportunity to learn. a2b3c1d1 13 Those who have not received enough opportunities to learn should be favored. a3b3c1d1 14 Those who make an effort should be given preference to learn. a4b3c1d1 15 Those who contribute more should be given preference to learn. a5b3c1d1 16 Those with special talents should be given preference to learn. a6b3c1d1 NOTE: a. For example, Item 5 describes a distribution according to arithmetic equality (a1) of a prestige resource (b1) assigned a positive valence (c1) in the context of broader competitive society (d1). resource classes (B), which implies another two-dimensional projection spanned by Axes 2 and 3. The distributive rules facet (A). As Figure 1a shows, the SSA plane can be cut (parti- tioned) into regions so that each one contains only items of one particular justice principle and rule. Moreover, the partition splits the plane into simply ordered regions that correspond to a linear pattern. Thus, East German adolescent respondents distinguish six types of dis- tributive rules along the predicted dimension of differentiation; that is, the item configura- tion ranges from SJJ that refer to the rule of arithmetic equality (least differentiating) to abil- ity (most differentiating). As expected, items pertaining to the need principle fall between the equality and equity principles. This analysis is error free--that is, all SJJ items lie in the region predicted by their content in the facet. When data is analyzed along age and gender lines (for convenience, not presented here), a minor deviation to this arrangement is obtained among adolescents age 18 to 22 years: A single SJJ referring to arithmetic equality lies in the adjacent region of equality of opportunity. The simplex ordering of distributive rules was represented in a geometrical configuration that permutated the observed SSJ in such a way that the correlations between items of the dif- ferent layers tend to become smaller as the facet elements grow apart (Table 3). In most cases, the correlations between SJJ are positive (ranging from 0.08 to 0.53). However, nega- tive correlations were obtained for judgments based on the equality rules and judgments based on the equity rules, indicating that these rules are perceived as slightly contradicting each other (correlations ranging from .02 to .12). The resource classes facet (B). Figure 1b shows that the resource classes facet (B) leads to a clear-cut partition of the SSA plane that resembles a set of concentric bands. The SJJ items are found within four radial regions that correspond to the prior substantive classification of resource classes. This partition indicates that resources are relatively differentiated by their semantic meaning; that is, each band contains a set of SJJ related to a particular resource. Moreover, East German adolescents distinguish among these four classes of resources 82 JOURNAL OF CROSS-CULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY Figures 1a & 1b: Smallest Space Analysis Projection Planes for Dar and Resh's 16 Social Justice Judgments Items, East Germany, Entire Sample according to the predicted dimension of particularism and nonconvertibility. Accordingly, SJJ regarding prestige are located in the innermost radial, followed by radials of SJJ pertain- ing to power, learning opportunities, and finally, money. This concentric arrangement means thatSJJ pertaining to particularisticresources correlate higher among each other, on average, than those pertaining to universalistic ones (see Table 3). It indicates a more diffuse and gen- eralized evaluation for particularistic resources and a more discriminant evaluation for uni- versalistic ones. The analysis is error free: All SJJ items lie in the region predicted by their content in the facet. When data is analyzed along age and gender lines (for convenience, not presented here), a deviation to this arrangement is obtained among those age 14 to 15 years and age 18 to 22 years: Single items referring to learning opportunities and money lie in the prestige region, respectively. STUDY 2 (SECOND REPLICATION)--WEST GERMAN ADULTS METHOD Schmitt's (1980) SJJ inventory comprises a set of 39 items intended to represent the four- faceted design. Each item represents a combination of a distributive principle (equality, need, or equity), a class of resources (material or symbolic, equivalent to money and pres- tige, respectively), a resource valence (positive or negative), and a type of social context (economic and competitive or educational and nurturing). Table 4 lists the items, classified by their correspondent facet elements. Each SJJ item is rated on a 6-point scale ranging from 1 (very unjust) to 6 (very just). The Schmitt SJJ inventory was administered in 1980 to a sample of 240 adults who lived in the vicinity of Trier, West Germany. Respondents were randomly sampled from profes- sional groups (e.g., members of the Christian Democratic Party and of social unions), and a phone subscription list. (For a detailed description, see Schmitt, 1980; Schmitt & Montada, Sabbagh / STRUCTURE OF SOCIAL JUSTICE JUDGMENTS 83 TABLE 3 Correlation (× 100) Among Six Distributive Rules and Average Correlation (× 100) of Social Justice Judgments by Resource Class Average Interitem Correlation Correlation Resource Class Univer- Particu- Distributive Rules a 1 2 3 4 5 6 salistic b laristic b 1. Arithmetic equality 21 c 30 c 2. Equality of opportunities 42 3. Need 33 33 4. Effort 02 08 24 30d 42 d 5. Contribution to society 05 04 19 53 6. Ability 12 05 18 52 50 NOTE: a. Calculated as the mean importance rating of each distributive rule, across resources. b. The universalistic resources include money and learning opportunities and the particularistic ones, prestige and power. c. The interitem mean includes all SJJ items pertaining to the rules of equality and need. d. The interitem mean includes all SJJ items pertaining to the equity rules (effort, contribution, and ability). 84 JOURNAL OF CROSS-CULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY TABLE 4 Schmitt's (1980) Social Justice Judgments Inventory Classified by Facets # Item Content Facet Profile a Positive outcomes Material resources 1. The most efficient company should win the construction bid. p3b4c1d1 2. The youngest company should win the construction bid. p2b4c1d1 3. The most productive workers should get more profits. p3b4c1d1 4. Low income workers should get more profits. p2b4c1d1 5. Profits should be equally shared among workers. p1b4c1d1 6. Books should be given to diligent pupils. p3b4c1d2 7. Books should be given to pupils from poor families. p2b4c1d2 8. The most talented students should get financial help. p3b4c1d2 9. Students from poor families should get financial help. p2b4c1d2 10. Financial help should be equally shared among students. p1b4c1d2 Symbolic resources 11. The best working companies should attend the center's inauguration. p3b1c1d1 12. New companies should attend the center's inauguration. p2b1c1d1 13. All companies should attend the center's inauguration. p1b1c1d1 14. Those who contributed most should appear on the plaque of honor. p3b1c1d1 15. Youngsters should appear on the plaque of honor. p2b1c1d1 16. Teachers should love the pupils with the best ideas. p3b1c1d2 17. Teachers should love the most needy pupils. p2b1c1d2 18. Teachers should love pupils equally. p1b1c1d2 19. Pupils who paint best should get a painting award. p3b1c1d2 20. Insecure pupils, who need support, should get a painting award. p2b1c1d2 21. Every painting should get an award. p1b1c1d2 Negative outcomes Material resources 22. Companies who create more pollution should pay more taxes. p3b4c2d1 23. Companies with economic difficulties should pay lower taxes. p2b4c2d1 24. All companies should pay the same amount of taxes. p1b4c2d1 25. Employers with profits should be exempt from shortening the workday. p3b4c2d1 26. Needed employers should be exempt from shortening the workday. p2b4c2d1 27. Employers should equally share the burden of a shorter workday. p1b4c2d1 28. The allowances of low-achieving pupils should be cut. p3b4c2d2 29. The allowances of well-established pupils should be cut. p2b4c2d2 30. All pupils' allowances should be equally cut. p1b4c2d2 Symbolic resources 31. The work supervisor should be reprimanded. p3b1c2d1 32. Workers who have a positive influence should be reprimanded. p2b1c2d1 33. All workers should be reprimanded. p1b1c2d1 34. Pupils who achieve less should be reprimanded. p3b1c2d2 35. Only pupils who react positively should be reprimanded. p2b1c2d2 36. All or none of the pupils should be reprimanded. p1b1c2d2 37. Teachers should yell at pupils who hit other children. p3b1c1d2 38. Teachers should yell at pupils who might improve their behavior. p2b1c1d2 39. Teachers should yell at all pupils equally. p1b1c1d2 NOTE:a. Forexample,Item1describesdistributionofa materialresource(b4)assigneda positive valence(c1)inan economic/competitive context (d1) according to equity (p3), while Item 36 describes distribution of a symbolic resource(b1)assignedanegativevalence(c2)inaneducational/nurturingcontext(d2)accordingtoequality(p1). 1982). Respondents were ages 15 to 84 years (average age = 40.2, SD = 16.45); gender distri- bution of the sample was 62% male respondents and 38% female respondents. RESULTS To represent the four facets of SJJ and to examine the replicability of the SJJ structure, four separate SSA analyses were applied to itemsubgroups in Schmitt's SJJ inventory: (a) 21 positive SJJ (#1 through #21), (b) 18 negative SJJ (#22 through #39), (c) 19 items pertaining to material resources (#1 through #10, #22 through #30) and (d) 20 items pertaining to sym- bolic items (#11 through #21, #31 through #39).8 In these SSA analyses (Figures 2a through 2d and 3a through 3d), four- and five-dimensional spaces were required for accurate data representations. Guttman's (1980) coefficients of alienation indicates a relatively good fit between the derived configuration and the correlation matrix of SJJ. The obtained coeffi- cients for the four separate SSA analyses were, .11, .10, .06, and .07, respectively. Moreover, the facet of distributive principles is always visualized on SSA planes (Axes 1 and 3) that are orthogonal to those of the other facets (Axes 3 and 4; Axes 3 and 5). Stem facet: Distributive principles (A). Similar to Study 1, results revealed that when a positive outcome distribution is at stake (Figure 2a), the SSA plane can be partitioned with- out error into distinct planar strips representing the three justice principles and their rank ordering along the dimension of differentiation. Moreover, the dynamics of relations between distributive principles is replicated when the analysis is limited to material or sym- bolic SJJ (Figures 2c and 2d). However, several deviations were obtained (where items did not fallin the region predicted by their content): three in the first case (#22, #27, #23) and two in the second (#33, #36). It is worth noting that when the analysis includes a subgroup of neg- ative SJJ items (Figure 2b), the predicted structure of justice principles is only partially sup- ported. The SSA plane shows that this facet is partitioned by lines into three regions repre- senting the justice principles; however, these regions are not ordered, as predicted, along the dimension of differentiation. The left layer includes items referring to the principle of need instead of the expected equity principle items, which fall in the middle layer. These findings suggest that the structure of justice principles and rules for positive and negative outcome distributions might not be identical and should therefore be treated separately. Similar to Study 1, the geometrical configuration pertaining to positive outcomes repre- sents the SJJ in a simplex structure; that is, in a way that the correlations between itemsof dif- ferent layers tend to become smaller as the elements of the distributive principles'facet grow farther apart (Table 5). Moreover, the correlation between the equality and equity principles (.16) is negative, indicating that these principles are perceived as contradictory. It is note- worthy, however, that when negative outcomes are at stake, the pattern of correlations turns is reversed (Table 5). Although the principles of equality and equity are positively correlated, the correlation between the principles of equality and need is negative. Modifying facets. The three modifying facets (B through D) are represented in the same SSA plane. This means that the same configuration of items can be simultaneously parti- tioned into several sets of regions. For instance, when valence (Facet C) is held constant, pos- itive SJJ items (Figure 3a) are partitioned by two concentric bands into symbolic and mate- rial resources (Facet B) and by a line into economic and competitive and educational and nurturing contexts (Facet D). A similar structure is found for negative SJJ items (Figure 3b). Moreover, when classes of resources are held constant, SJJ items are partitioned into two Sabbagh / STRUCTURE OF SOCIAL JUSTICE JUDGMENTS 85 concentric bands representing positive and negative outcomes and by a line into contexts (Figures 3c and 3d). The following explains results for each facet in greater detail. Resource classes facet (B). The current study examined only two classes of resources: material (universalistic) and symbolic (particularistic). When positive SJJ are at stake (Fig- ure 3a), West German adults distinguish between material and symbolic resources along the dimension of particularism and convertibility. Thus, SSA projection planes are partitioned into two concentric regions: SJJ referring to symbolic resources lie in the inner circle, and those referring to material resources in the outer circle; that is, symbolic SJJ correlate higher among each other, on average, than those pertaining to universalitic ones. Moreover, the dynamics of relations among resource classes is replicated for negative SJJ (Figure 3b). 86 JOURNAL OF CROSS-CULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY Figures 2a - 2d:Smallest Space Analysis Projection Planes for Stem Facet of Distributive Principles, Schmitt's Social Justice Judgments Items, West German Sample. However, three positive SJJ (#13, #14, #15) and three negative SJJ (#30, #36, #39) did not fall in their expected regions. Table 5 shows that in most of the cases, the average correlation of SJJ is indeed larger for symbolic than for material resources. Yet these differences are relatively modest when posi- tive outcomes are at stake. Moreover, when negative outcomes and the equality principle are at stake, the average interitem correlation is larger for material resources than for symbolic ones (0.26 vs. 0.03, respectively). Resource valence facet (C). Visualization of the resource valence facet is obtained only when the class of resource being distributed is held constant, that is, when separate SSA Sabbagh / STRUCTURE OF SOCIAL JUSTICE JUDGMENTS 87 Figure 3a - 3d: Smallest Space Analysis ProjectionPlanes for Modifying Facets of Resource Class, Resource Valence, and Social Context, Schmitt's Social Justice Judgments Items, West German Sample. analyses are applied to items pertaining to material resources (Figure 3c) and symbolic items (Figure 3d). For material and symbolic resources, this facet is represented on a concentric plane on which negative SJJ fall in the inner circle, and positive ones are located in the outer circle (see also Sabbagh & Schmitt, 1998). Thus, the concentric structure of positive and negative SJJ is only valid for specific resources. Social context facet (D). SJJ are distinguished by type of social context in all four condi- tions (Figures 3a through 3d). Regardless of the condition (positive, negative, material, and symbolic SJJ), a line partitions the SSA projection planes into two simple regions: one con- taining SJJ items for economic and competitive contexts (weaker solidarity), and the other with SJJ for educational and nurturing contexts (stronger solidarity). However, two positive SJJ (#8, #18), three negative SJJ (#22, #30, #31), three material SJJ (#1, #10, #24), and three symbolic SJJ (#18, #35, #38) did not fall in their expected regions. DISCUSSION The current study addressed the question of what it is that constitutes SJJ and attempted to shed light on the system underlying the process by which people make such judgments. It suggested a multifaceted conceptualization of the domain of SJJ and tested its replicability across two countries, positive and negative outcomes, adolescent and adult samples, and dif- ferent instruments for measuring SJJ. The facets arraying SJJ contents are (a) justice princi- ples and distributive rules, (b) classes of social resources, (c) resource valence, and (d) social contexts. The facets'roles and their interrelations generated a cylindrex structure that can be interpreted as follows. A RATIONALE FOR THE CYLINDREX By combining the separate structures obtained for each SJJ facet, the space configured by the SSA two-dimensional projections may be modeled as an overall structure that represents 88 JOURNAL OF CROSS-CULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY TABLE 5 Correlation (× 100) Among Three Distributive Principles and Average Correlation (× 100) of Social Justice Judgments by Resource Class Average Interitem Correlation Correlation Resource Class Distributive Principles a 1 2 3 4 5 6 Material Symbolic Positive outcomes 1. Equality 14 22 2. Need 04 20 23 3. Equity 16 23 15 18 Negative outcomes 4. Equality 39 3 14 26 3 5. Need 07 52 32 9 19 47 6. Equity 20 12 59 16 17 2 36 NOTE: a. Calculated as the mean importance rating of each distributive principle, across resources and contexts. the different roles played by the facets (Borg & Shye, 1995; Canter, 1985; Levy, 1985). To be more specific, SSA analyses in Study 1 and Study 2 indicate that the facet of justice princi- ples and rules is always represented on an axial plane. Addition of the resource classes facet, which is represented in an orthogonal radial plane, renders a cylindrex structure of SJJ (Fig- ure 4). The SJJ cylindrex in Study 1 (Figure 4, section I) is larger than the one obtained in Study 2 (Figure 4, section II) because Facet A and Facet B include more types of rules and resources. There is evidence, however, that the structure is valid mainly for positive outcome distributions. Study 2 indicates that, in the case of negative outcome distributions, justice principles are arranged in an axial form, but not according to the dimension of differentia- tion. This asymmetry in the relations among justice principles might be attributable to the differential meaning and application of the need principle in the context of positive and nega- tive distributions. To be more specific, when positive outcomes are distributed according to the principle of need, people usually refer to the recipient's preallocative level (prior to resource distribution); when negative outcomes are distributed, they usually refer to the postallocative level (the state of the individual after distribution; Elster, 1992). The first case ensures that the entitled (needy) recipient receives the positive outcome, whereas the second case prevents additional injury (or unnecessary pain) to those who need help. Study 2 also enabled us to add the resource valence and social context (Figure 4, sections II and IIa). These facets, which are represented on a shared SSA plane with the resource class's facet, reconstruct the cylindrex structure of SJJ, adding greater refinement to the dis- tinction between SJJ meanings. However, the organization of SJJ in differing social contexts according to the dimension of socialsolidarity was only partiallyexamined. Future examina- tion requires systematic analyses of more types of social contexts. Moreover, the organiza- tion of SJJ according to the modified facets revealed that several items did not fall in their expected regions. Thus, future research should further test the validity of this structure and its correspondent measures. Through reconstruction of the mapping sentence, the cylindrex structure provides a rep- resentation of the a priori definition of SJJ. An explanation of why this is the case can be fur- ther elaborated. The cylindrex displays the distinction between the stem and modifying fac- ets of SJJ. Justice principles and rules, which are the primary classifiers of SSJ, are always represented on an axis that specifies the level of differentiation considered just. The other three components of SJJ, which are always represented on a shared orthogonal base, merely modify SJJ in the sense of delineating the conditions of distribution--what is to be distrib- uted (class of resource); which valence is ascribed to the resource that is being distributed (positive or negative); and where distribution takes place (the social context). This structur- ing of SJJ implies that, although the stem and modifying facets are independent in terms of semantic meaning, the modifying facets are interdependent. To be more specific, representa- tion of the resource valence requires that the resource class be held constant. In other words, the facet of social resource class subsumes the resource valence facet; valence is always determined with respect to a specific class of resource that is being distributed. Moreover, despite the analytical distinction between social contexts (Facet C) and resource classes (Facet B), resources are context bound. Exchange of universalistic resources (such as money or information) mainly occurs in economic and competitive contexts, whereas exchange of particularistic resources (such as love or services) occurs more in educational and nurturing contexts (Foa & Foa, 1974; Törnblom & Foa, 1983). This correspondence points to a shared semantic meaning between Facet B and Facet D. Nonetheless, a justice principle or rule may be endorsed in one context but not in another considering the same resource--possibly owing to different meanings that are assigned to a specific resource across contexts (Dar & Sabbagh / STRUCTURE OF SOCIAL JUSTICE JUDGMENTS 89 Resh, 2001; Walzer, 1983). For example, equity may be endorsed for distributing money in the workplace, but not in a nurturing context (such as the school or family). In other words, the resource and contexts facets are distinguishable. The cylindrex structure further clarifies the nature of the modifying facets of SJJ. The concentric arrangement of resource classes reflects the intrinsic affective meaning of non- convertible resources and their relation to core societal values (Parsons, 1951). As men- tioned before, it also implies a diffuse and generalized evaluation pertaining to this resource class; that is, people tend to subscribe to a single principle or rule of justice. For instance, people tend to firmly adhere to egalitarian justice when distributing prestige or influence but not when distributing money. This consistency may mirror greater ego involvement, which motivates the individual to cling to a dominant social and moral claim regardless of the situa- tion (Burgoyne, Swift, & Marshall, 1993; Hochschild, 1981). In contrast, the location of convertible resources (e.g., money) at the peripheral radial reflects their extrinsic instrumen- tal meaning (Parsons, 1951). It also implies a more discriminant evaluation; that is, individu- als tend to suit the distributive principle or rule to the situation. For instance, people do not necessarily adhere to egalitarian justice when distributing learning opportunities or money. This dissociation may mirror a detached regard to SJJ that rationally acts to advance specific aims pertaining to the distribution of a convertible (universalistic) class of resource (Burgoyne et al., 1993). 90 JOURNAL OF CROSS-CULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY Figure 4: The Cylindrex Structure of Social Justice Judgments (Schematic): I: Study 1, East German Ado- lescents, With Two Partitioning Facets (after Sabbagh, Dar, & Resh, 1994); II-IIa: Study 2, West German Adults, With Four Partitioning Facets. The nature of SJJ modification by the resource valence facet is similar to the one stated for resource class. Accordingly, negative SJJ are less discriminating in their choice of distribu- tive rules than in positive ones. This pattern supports prior findings, reflecting, in turn, the high ego involvement and emotional intensity of negative experiences (Jasso, 1993, 1994; Tversky & Kahneman, 1987). IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE CROSS-CULTURAL RESEARCH ON JUSTICE JUDGMENTS The current study examined the generalizability of earlier research findings obtained in an Israeli sample to findings obtained in East and West German samples. Separate replica- tions were conducted in the East and West German samples, which revealed that the multidi- mensional configurations of SJJ intercorrelations could be partitioned into distinct regions of items (or clusters) that roughly correspond to the facets'hypothesized elements and their expected arrangements. Thus the observed German data patterns successfully replicated the original Israeli analysis. Moreover, these findings were replicated in adolescent and adult samples, and using different SSJ instruments. More generally, these findings highlight sev- eral important issues for future cross-cultural research on justice judgments. First, the observed similarities in the empirical configurations of SJJ (mainly regarding the facets of distributive rules and classes of social resources) appear to be indicative of com- mon meanings of SJJ (i.e., structural equivalence) that are shared by respondents in the Israeli and German samples (Byrne & Campbell, 1999; van de Vijver & Leung, 1997). This apparent convergence underscores the importance of theorizing about the structure of SJJ at the etic level, while at the same time facilitating exploration of culture-specific (emic) fea- tures of distributive justice judgments within these contexts (Kagitcibasi & Berry, 1989; Miller-Loessi, 1995; Smith & Bond, 1993). In particular, future research efforts ought to attempt to further clarify the question of what guiding rules (egalitarian, equitarian) people in Israel and Germany endorse for distributing different classes of resources (particularistic, universalistic) in society. Second, it should be kept in mind that the social justice distinctions employed in the cur- rent research may be disproportionately reflective of Western-derived values of justice (Smith & Bond, 1993; van de Vijver & Leung, 1997) and as such may not be adequately cap- turing other potentially important justice-related value dimensions characteristic of popula- tions from non-Western cultures (Cheng et al., 2001). Consequently, determination of a SJJ structure that purports to represent a fundamental and universal psychological process will require many further replications, in a variety of non-Western cultural contexts, before earn- ing any legitimate claim to universality (Leung & Zhang, 1995; van de Vijver & Leung, 2000). To ensure that it represents the full range of potential distributive value categories that could emerge in these cross-cultural comparisons, future research efforts should therefore include a more extensive sampling of the justice domain in the instrument of measurement (Miller-Loessi, 1995) and should make conscious efforts to include items that are culture specific. (For an example of this approach, see Schwartz, 1992; Schwartz & Bardi, 2001; Schwartz, Melech, et al., 2001). Extension of the present multifaceted approach to non- Western contexts would prove particularly valuable if applied in the context of systematic cross-cultural studies of justice perception (Kluegel, Mason, & Wegener, 1995; Leung, 1988). Taking the cylindrex structure of SJJ into account, SJJ priorities in a variety of differ- ent cultures could be examined holistically with respect to the overall structure of SJJ con- tents, and not just individual rules, resources, and so on. SJJ could then be studied as an Sabbagh / STRUCTURE OF SOCIAL JUSTICE JUDGMENTS 91 integrated and heuristic system of evaluations, regarding distributive justness (Schwartz, 1992). Such a comprehensive, and cross-cultural, line of inquiry would enhance our understanding of the universal and the particular aspects of SJJ and the varied social conditions under which they occur. APPENDIX Definition of Distribution Rules Arithmetic equality favors an equal share of allocated resources to all participants, regardless of per- sonal traits, social inputs, or outputs. Equality of opportunities states that every individual, regardless of social status, should have equal access to resources. Need calls for the satisfaction of all people's basic needs. Effort states that rewards be distributed on the basis of one's conscious effort, regardless of whether one was actually productive. Contribution calls forresource allocation according to productivity,even if it wasachieved effortlessly. Ability favors distribution of rewards according to individual talents, implied by their potential social contribution. NOTES 1. The current study deals with order-related aspects of distributive justice (Jasso, 1989), that is, evaluations of socially shared patterns that guide resource distribution in society. Outcome-related aspects of distributive justice (namely, the sense of relative deprivation), as well as procedural and interactional aspects of justice, are beyond the scope of the current study (for reviews see, Dar & Resh, 2001; Hegtvedt & Markovsky, 1995). 2. For overviews that focus on the phenomenology of SJJ and on their antecedents and consequences in diverse societies, see Mikula, Petri, and Tanzer (1990) and Tyler, Boeckmann, Smith, and Huo (1997). 3. See, for example, Cohen (1987), Deutsch (1985), Miller (1999), and Törnblom (1988). 4. For other possible classifications, see Dar and Resh (2001) and Jasso (1980). 5. Parsons's (1959) analysis of the primary- and secondary-school classroom as a social system suggests that, in the process of socialization, schools shift from a strong solidarity pattern of relations (i.e., particularistic, diffuse, affective, and ascribed relations) to a moderate one (more emphasis on universalistic, specific, instrumental, and competitive relations). 6. For furtherexplanationof the role of the mappingsentence in the definition of multivariate attributes, see Can- ter (1985). 7. This data set has been used in a number of studies. For example, see Hurrelmann and Palentien (1994). 8. It is worthnotingthat, whenall 39SJJ items are includedin the SSA analysis (notpresented),randomconfigu- rations of SJJ are obtained for the facets of resource valence and social context; that is, the points representing posi- tive and negative SJJ and those pertaining to competitive and economic and educational and nurturing contexts can- not be discriminated by any partition. REFERENCES Borg, I., & Lingoes, J. C. (1987). Multidimensional similarity structure analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag. Borg, I., & Shye, S. (1995). Facet theory: Form and content. New York: Springer-Verlag. Brickman,P., Folger, R., Goode,E.,& Shul,Y. (1981).Microjusticeandmacrojustice.InM. J. Lerner& S. C. Lerner (Eds.), The justice motive in social behavior (pp. 173-202). New York: Plenum. 92 JOURNAL OF CROSS-CULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY Burgoyne, C., Swift, A., & Marshall, G. (1993). Inconsistency in beliefs about distributive justice: A cautionary note. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 23(4), 327-342. Byrne, B., & Campbell, T. L. (1999). Cross-cultural comparisons and the presumption of equivalent measurement and theoretical structure. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30, 555-574. Canter, D. (1985). Facet theory. New York: Springer-Verlag. Cheng, F. M., Leung,K., Zhang,J. X., Sun, H., Gan, Y., Song, W., et al. (2001).IndigenousChinese personality con- structs. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32, 407-433. Cohen, R. L. (1987). Distributive justice: Theory and research. Social Justice Research, 1(1), 19-40. Dar, Y., & Resh, N. (2001).Exploringthe multifaceted structure of sense of deprivation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 63-81. Deutsch, M. (1985). Distributive justice. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Douglas, M. (1982). In the active voice. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Durkheim, E. (1933). The division of labor in society (J. W. Swain, Trans.). New York: Macmillan. (Original work published in 1893). Eckhoff, T. (1974). Justice: Its determinants in social interaction. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Rotterdam Univer- sity Press. Elster, J. (1992). Local justice. New York: Russell Sage. Fiske,A.P.(1991).Structures ofsociallife:Thefourelementaryformsofhumanrelations.NewYork:FreePress. Fiske, A. P., & Tetlock, P. E. (1997). Taboo tradeoffs: Reactions to transactions that transgress the spheres of justice. Political Psychology, 18, 225-297. Foa, U. G., & Foa, E. B. (1974). Societal structures of the mind. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas. Folger, R., & Copanzano,R. (1998).Organizationaljustice andhumanresource management. ThousandOaks, CA: Sage. Green,S. J. D. (1988).Emile Durkheimonhumantalents andtwo traditionsofsocial justice. British Journalof Soci- ology, 40, 97-117. Greenberg, J., & Cohen, R. L. (1982). Why justice? Normative and instrumental interpretations. In J. Greenberg & R. L. Cohen (Eds.), Equity and justice in social behavior (pp. 437-469). New York: Academic Press. Guttman, L. (1968). A general non-metric technique for finding the smallest coordinate space for a configuration of points. Psychometrika, 33, 469-506. Hamilton, V. L., & Sanders, J. (1992). Everyday justice. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Hegtvedt, K. A., & Markovsky, B. (1995). Justice and injustice. In K. S. Cook, G. A. Fine, & J. S. House (Eds.), Sociological perspectives on social psychology (pp. 257-280). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Hochschild,J. L.(1981).What's fair?Americanbeliefsaboutdistributivejustice.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniver- sity Press. Hurrelmann, K., & Palentien, C. (1994). Politics, communication and media: Youth in Germany. Politische Kommunikation in Hoerfunk und Fersehen. Elektronische Medien in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Vol. Sonderheft Nr. 8, pp. 175-184). Opladen: Leske and Budrich. Jasso, G. (1980). A new theory of distributive justice. American Sociological Review, 45, 3-32. Jasso, G. (1989). The theory of the distributive-justice force in human affairs: Analyzing the three central questions. In J. Berger, M. Zelditch Jr., & B. Anderson (Eds.), Sociological theories in progress: New formulations (pp. 354-387). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Jasso, G. (1993). Choice and emotion in comparison theory. Rationality and Society, 5(2), 231-274. Jasso, G. (1994). Assessing individual and group differences in the sense of justice: Framework and application to gender differences in the justice of earnings. Social Science Research, 23, 368-406. Kagitcibasi, C., & Berry, J. W. (1989). Cross-cultural psychology: Current research and trends. Annual Review of Psychology, 40, 493-531. Kayser, E., Schwinger, T., & Cohen, R. L. (1984).Laypersons'conceptionsof social relationships:A test of contract theory. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 1, 433-458. Kellerhals, J., Coenen-Huther, J., & Modak, M. (1990). Justice and the family: An exploratory analysis. Archives- Europeennes-de Sociologie, 31, 117-140. Kluegel, J. R., Mason, D. S., & Wegener, B. (Eds.). (1995). Social justice and political change: Public opinion in capitalist and post-communist States. New York: Aldine de Gruyter. Kruskal, J. B. (1964). Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a nonmetric hypothesis. Psychometrika, 29, 1-27. Lerner, M. J. (1975). The justice motive in social behavior: Introduction. Journal of Social Issues, 31(3), 1-19. Leung, K. (1988). Theoretical advances in justice behavior: Some cross-cultural inputs. In M. H. Bond (Ed.), The cross-cultural challenge to social psychology (pp. 218-229). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Leung, K., & Zhang, J. X. (1995). Systemic considerations: Factors facilitating and impeding the development of psychology in developing countries. International Journal of Psychology, 20, 133-151. Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? In K. J. Gergen, M. S. Greenberg, & R. H. Willis (Eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research (pp. 27-55). New York: Plenum. Levy, S. (1985). Lawful roles of facets in social theories. In D. Canter (Ed.), Facet theory (pp. 59-96). New York: Springer-Verlag. Sabbagh / STRUCTURE OF SOCIAL JUSTICE JUDGMENTS 93 Levy, S. (1990). The mapping sentence in cumulative theory construction: Well-being as an example. In J. J. Hox & J. de Jong-Gierveld (Eds.), Operationalization and research strategy (pp. 155-177). Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger. Lonner, W. J. (1980).The search for psychologicaluniversals. In H. C. Triandis & W. W. Lambert (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology, 1: Perspectives (pp. 143-204). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Meeker, B. F., & Elliot, G. C. (1987). Counting the costs: Equity and the allocation of negative group products. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50(1), 7-15. Mikula, G., Petri, B., & Tanzer, N. (1990). What people regard as unjust: Types and structures of everyday experi- ences of injustice. European Journal of Social Psychology, 20, 133-149. Miller, D. (1999). Principles of social justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Miller-Loessi, K. (1995). Comparative social psychology: Cross-cultural and cross-national. In K. S. Cook, G. A. Fine, & J. S. House (Eds.), Sociological perspectives on social psychology (pp. 397-420). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Mills, J., & Clark, M. S. (1982). Exchange and communal relationships. In L. Wheeler (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 121-144). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Mohr, J. W. (1998). Measuring meaning structures. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 345-370. Parsons, T. (1951). The social system. Glencoe, IL: Free Press. Parsons, T. (1959). The school as a social system: Some of its functions in American society. Harvard Educational Review, 29, 297-318. Perelman, C. (1967). Justice. New York: Random House. Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Reis, H. T. (1984). The multidimensionality of justice. In R. Folger (Ed.), The sense of injustice: Social psychologi- cal perspectives (pp. 25-61). New York: Plenum. Sabbagh,C., Dar,Y.,&Resh,N.(1994).Thestructureofsocialjusticejudgments:A facet approach.SocialPsychol- ogy Quarterly, 57(3), 244-261. Sabbagh,C.,&Schmitt,M.(1998).Exploringthestructureofpositiveandnegativejusticejudgments.SocialJustice Research, 11(4), 381-395. Schmitt, M. (1980). Justice judgments in distribution decisions: Personal and situational effects. Unpublished mas- ter's thesis, University of Trier, Trier, Germany. Schmitt, M., & Montada, L. (1982). Determinants of experienced justice. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 13, 32- 44. Schwartz, S. H. (1992).Universals in the contentand structure of values: Theoreticaladvances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1-65).Orlando,FL: Academic Press. Schwartz, S. H., & Bardi, A. (2001).Value hierarchiesacross cultures.Journalof Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(3), 268-290. Schwartz, S. H., Melech, G., Lehmann, A., Burgess, S., Harris, M., & Owens, V. (2001). Extending the cross- cultural validity of the theory of basic human values with a different method of measurement. Journal of Cross- Cultural Psychology, 32(5), 519-542. Shepard, R. N. (1974). Representation of structure in similarity data.Psychometrika, 39, 373-421. Siebenhuener, S. (1993). Youth in Saxony. Markkleeberg, Germany: UFIM German. Smith, P. B., & Bond, M. H. (1993). Social psychology across cultures. Cambridge, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Törnblom,K. Y. (1988).Positive and negative allocations: A typologyand a model for conflicting justice principles. InE.J.Lawler&B.Markovsky(Eds.),Advancesingroupprocesses (Vol.5,pp.141-168).Greenwich,CT:JAI. Törnblom, K. Y. (1992). The social psychologyof distributive justice. In K. R. Scherer (Ed.), Justice: Interdisciplin- ary perspectives (pp. 177-285). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Törnblom, K. Y., & Foa, U. G. (1983). Choice of a distribution principle: Crosscultural evidence on the effects of resources. Acta Sociologica, 26(2), 161-173. Törnblom,K. Y., & Jonsson, D. R. (1985).Subrules of the equality and contribution principles: Their perceived fair- ness in distribution and retribution. Social Psychology Quarterly, 48(3), 249-261. Törnblom, K. Y., Muehlhausen, S. M., & Jonsson, D. R. (1991). The allocation of positive and negative outcomes: When is the equality principle fair for both? In R. Vermunt & H. Steensma (Eds.), Social justice in human rela- tions: Societal and psychological origins of justice (Vol. 1, pp. 59-99). New York: Plenum. Tversky, A.,&Kahneman,D. (1987).Rationalchoiceandtheframingofdecisions.InR. M.Hogarth&M.W. Reder (Eds.), Rational choice: The contrast between economics and psychology (pp. 67-94). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Tyler, T. R., Boeckmann, R. J., Smith, H. J., & Huo, Y. J. (1997). Social justice in a diverse society. Boulder, CO: Westview. van de Vijver, F., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. van de Vijver, F., & Leung,K. (2000).Methodologicalissues in psychologicalresearch on culture. Journalof Cross- Cultural Psychology, 31, 35-51. Walzer, M. (1983). Spheres of justice. New York: Basic Books. 94 JOURNAL OF CROSS-CULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY Weber, M. (1947). Class, status, and party. In H. H. Gerth & W. C. Mills (Eds.), From Max Weber: Essays in sociol- ogy (n.p.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Young, F. W. (1984). The general Euclidian model. In H. G. Law, C. W. Snyder, J. A. Hattie, & R. P. McDonald (Eds.), Research methods for multimode data analysis (pp. 440-469). New York: Praeger. Clara Sabbagh is lecturer in sociology of education at the University of Haifa, Israel. Her current research interests include the structure of justice judgments, and activation of justice systems at micro and macro lev- els. In these areas, she adopts a cross-cultural perspective with the aim of distinguishing between universal and culture-specific aspects of justice. Sabbagh / STRUCTURE OF SOCIAL JUSTICE JUDGMENTS 95 </meta-value></custom-meta></custom-meta-wrap></article-meta></front><back><notes><p><list list-type="order"><list-item><p>1. The current study deals with order-related aspects of distributive justice (Jasso, 1989), that is, evaluations of socially shared patterns that guide resource distribution in society. Outcome-related aspects of distributive justice (namely, the sense of relative deprivation), as well as procedural and interactional aspects of justice, are beyond the scope of the current study (for reviews see, Dar & Resh, 2001; Hegtvedt & Markovsky, 1995).</p></list-item><list-item><p>2. For overviews that focus on the phenomenology of SJJ and on their antecedents and consequences in diverse societies, see Mikula, Petri, and Tanzer (1990) and Tyler, Boeckmann, Smith, and Huo (1997).</p></list-item><list-item><p>3. See, for example, Cohen (1987), Deutsch (1985), Miller (1999), and Törnblom (1988).</p></list-item><list-item><p>4. For other possible classifications, see Dar and Resh (2001) and Jasso (1980).</p></list-item><list-item><p>5. Parsons’s (1959) analysis of the primary- and secondary-school classroom as a social system suggests that, in the process of socialization, schools shift from a strong solidarity pattern of relations (i.e., particularistic, diffuse, affective, and ascribed relations) to a moderate one (more emphasis on universalistic, specific, instrumental, and competitive relations).</p></list-item><list-item><p>6. For further explanation of the role of the mapping sentence in the definition of multivariate attributes, see Canter (1985).</p></list-item><list-item><p>7. This data set has been used in a number of studies. For example, see Hurrelmann and Palentien (1994).</p></list-item><list-item><p>8. It is worth noting that, when all 39 SJJ items are included in the SSA analysis (not presented), random configurations of SJJ are obtained for the facets of resource valence and social context; that is, the points representing positive and negative SJJ and those pertaining to competitive and economic and educational and nurturing contexts cannot be discriminated by any partition.</p></list-item></list></p></notes><ref-list><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Borg, I.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Lingoes, J. C.</surname></name> (<year>1987</year>). <source>Multidimensional similarity structure analysis</source>. <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Springer-Verlag</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Borg, I.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Shye, S.</surname></name> (<year>1995</year>). <source>Facet theory: Form and content</source>. <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Springer-Verlag</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Brickman, P.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Folger, R.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Goode, E.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Shul, Y.</surname></name> (<year>1981</year>). <article-title>Microjustice and macrojustice</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>M. J. Lerner&</surname></name><name name-style="western"><surname>S. C. Lerner</surname></name> (Eds.), <source>The justice motive in social behavior</source> (pp. <fpage>173</fpage>-<lpage>202</lpage>). <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Plenum</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Burgoyne, C.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Swift, A.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Marshall, G.</surname></name> (<year>1993</year>). <article-title>Inconsistency in beliefs about distributive justice: A cautionary note</article-title>. <source>Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour</source>, <volume>23</volume>(<issue>4</issue>), <fpage>327</fpage>-<lpage>342</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Byrne, B.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Campbell, T. L.</surname></name> (<year>1999</year>). <article-title>Cross-cultural comparisons and the presumption of equivalent measurement and theoretical structure</article-title>. <source>Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology</source>, <volume>30</volume>, <fpage>555</fpage>-<lpage>574</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Canter, D.</surname></name> (<year>1985</year>). <source>Facet theory</source>. <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Springer-Verlag</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Cheng, F. M.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Leung, K.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Zhang, J. X.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Sun, H.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Gan, Y.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Song, W.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>et al.</surname></name> (<year>2001</year>). <article-title>Indigenous Chinese personality constructs</article-title>. <source>Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology</source>, <volume>32</volume>, <fpage>407</fpage>-<lpage>433</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Cohen, R. L.</surname></name> (<year>1987</year>). <article-title>Distributive justice: Theory and research</article-title>. <source>Social Justice Research</source>, <volume>1</volume>(<issue>1</issue>), <fpage>19</fpage>-<lpage>40</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Dar, Y.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Resh, N.</surname></name> (<year>2001</year>). <article-title>Exploring the multifaceted structure of sense of deprivation</article-title>. <source>European Journal of Social Psychology</source>, <volume>31</volume>, <fpage>63</fpage>-<lpage>81</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Deutsch, M.</surname></name> (<year>1985</year>). <source>Distributive justice</source>. <publisher-loc>New Haven, CT</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Yale University Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Douglas, M.</surname></name> (<year>1982</year>). <source>In the active voice</source>. <publisher-loc>London</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Routledge & Kegan Paul</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Durkheim, E.</surname></name> (<year>1933</year>). <source>The division of labor in society</source> (J. W. Swain, Trans.). <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Macmillan</publisher-name>. (Original work published in 1893).</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Eckhoff, T.</surname></name> (<year>1974</year>). <source>Justice: Its determinants in social interaction</source>. <publisher-loc>Rotterdam, The Netherlands</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Rotterdam University Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Elster, J.</surname></name> (<year>1992</year>). <source>Local justice</source>. <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Russell Sage</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Fiske, A. P.</surname></name> (<year>1991</year>). <source>Structures of sociallife: The four elementary forms of human relations</source>. <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Free Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Fiske, A. P.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Tetlock, P. E.</surname></name> (<year>1997</year>). <article-title>Taboo tradeoffs: Reactions to transactions that transgress the spheres of justice</article-title>. <source>Political Psychology</source>, <volume>18</volume>, <fpage>225</fpage>-<lpage>297</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Foa, U. G.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Foa, E. B.</surname></name> (<year>1974</year>). <source>Societal structures of the mind</source>. <publisher-loc>Springfield, IL</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Charles C Thomas</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Folger, R.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Copanzano, R.</surname></name> (<year>1998</year>). <source>Organizational justice and human resource management</source>. <publisher-loc>Thousand Oaks, CA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Sage</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Green, S. J. D.</surname></name> (<year>1988</year>). <article-title>Emile Durkheim on human talents and two traditions of social justice</article-title>. <source>British Journalof Sociology</source>, <volume>40</volume>, <fpage>97</fpage>-<lpage>117</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Greenberg, J.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Cohen, R. L.</surname></name> (<year>1982</year>). <article-title>Why justice? Normative and instrumental interpretations</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>J. Greenberg</surname></name> & <name name-style="western"><surname>R. L. Cohen</surname></name> (Eds.), <source>Equity and justice in social behavior</source> (pp. <fpage>437</fpage>-<lpage>469</lpage>). <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Academic Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Guttman, L.</surname></name> (<year>1968</year>). <article-title>A general non-metric technique for finding the smallest coordinate space for a configuration of points</article-title>. <source>Psychometrika</source>, <volume>33</volume>, <fpage>469</fpage>-<lpage>506</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Hamilton, V. L.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Sanders, J.</surname></name> (<year>1992</year>). <source>Everyday justice</source>. <publisher-loc>New Haven, CT</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Yale University Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Hegtvedt, K. A.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Markovsky, B.</surname></name> (<year>1995</year>). <article-title>Justice and injustice</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>K. S. Cook</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>G. A. Fine</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>J. S. House</surname></name> (Eds.), <source>Sociological perspectives on social psychology</source> (pp. <fpage>257</fpage>-<lpage>280</lpage>). <publisher-loc>Boston</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Allyn & Bacon</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Hochschild, J. L.</surname></name> (<year>1981</year>). <source>What’s fair? American beliefs about distributive justice</source>. <publisher-loc>Cambridge, MA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Harvard University Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Hurrelmann, K.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Palentien, C.</surname></name> (<year>1994</year>). <article-title>Politics, communication and media: Youth in Germany</article-title>. <source>Politische Kommunikation in Hoerfunk und Fersehen. Elektronische Medien in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland</source> (Vol. Sonderheft Nr. 8, pp. <fpage>175</fpage>-<lpage>184</lpage>). <publisher-loc>Opladen</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Leske and Budrich</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Jasso, G.</surname></name> (<year>1980</year>). <article-title>A new theory of distributive justice</article-title>. <source>American Sociological Review</source>, <volume>45</volume>, <fpage>3</fpage>-<lpage>32</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Jasso, G.</surname></name> (<year>1989</year>). <article-title>The theory of the distributive-justice force in human affairs: Analyzing the three central questions</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>J. Berger</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>M. Zelditch Jr.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>B. Anderson</surname></name> (Eds.), <source>Sociological theories in progress: New formulations</source> (pp. <fpage>354</fpage>-<lpage>387</lpage>). <publisher-loc>Newbury Park, CA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Sage</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Jasso, G.</surname></name> (<year>1993</year>). <article-title>Choice and emotion in comparison theory</article-title>. <source>Rationality and Society</source>, <volume>5</volume>(<issue>2</issue>), <fpage>231</fpage>-<lpage>274</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Jasso, G.</surname></name> (<year>1994</year>). <article-title>Assessing individual and group differences in the sense of justice: Framework and application to gender differences in the justice of earnings</article-title>. <source>Social Science Research</source>, <volume>23</volume>, <fpage>368</fpage>-<lpage>406</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Kagitcibasi, C.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Berry, J. W.</surname></name> (<year>1989</year>). <article-title>Cross-cultural psychology: Current research and trends</article-title>. <source>Annual Review of Psychology</source>, <volume>40</volume>, <fpage>493</fpage>-<lpage>531</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Kayser, E.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Schwinger, T.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Cohen, R. L.</surname></name> (<year>1984</year>). <article-title>Laypersons’ conceptions of social relationships: A test of contract theory</article-title>. <source>Journal of Social and Personal Relationships</source>, <volume>1</volume>, <fpage>433</fpage>-<lpage>458</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Kellerhals, J.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Coenen-Huther, J.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Modak, M.</surname></name> (<year>1990</year>). <article-title>Justice and the family: An exploratory analysis</article-title>. <source>Archives-Europeennes-de Sociologie</source>, <volume>31</volume>, <fpage>117</fpage>-<lpage>140</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Kluegel, J. R.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Mason, D. S.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Wegener, B.</surname></name> (Eds.). (<year>1995</year>). <source>Social justice and political change: Public opinion in capitalist and post-communist States</source>. <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Aldine de Gruyter</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Kruskal, J. B.</surname></name> (<year>1964</year>). <article-title>Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a nonmetric hypothesis</article-title>. <source>Psychometrika</source>, <volume>29</volume>, <fpage>1</fpage>-<lpage>27</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Lerner, M. J.</surname></name> (<year>1975</year>). <article-title>The justice motive in social behavior: Introduction</article-title>. <source>Journal of Social Issues</source>, <volume>31</volume>(<issue>3</issue>), <fpage>1</fpage>-<lpage>19</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Leung, K.</surname></name> (<year>1988</year>). <article-title>Theoretical advances in justice behavior: Some cross-cultural inputs</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>M. H. Bond</surname></name> (Ed.), <source>The cross-cultural challenge to social psychology</source> (pp. <fpage>218</fpage>-<lpage>229</lpage>). <publisher-loc>Beverly Hills, CA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Sage</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Leung, K.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Zhang, J. X.</surname></name> (<year>1995</year>). <article-title>Systemic considerations: Factors facilitating and impeding the development of psychology in developing countries</article-title>. <source>International Journal of Psychology</source>, <volume>20</volume>, <fpage>133</fpage>-<lpage>151</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Leventhal, G. S.</surname></name> (<year>1980</year>). <article-title>What should be done with equity theory?</article-title> In <name name-style="western"><surname>K. J. Gergen</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>M. S. Greenberg</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>R. H. Willis</surname></name> (Eds.), <source>Social exchange: Advances in theory and research</source> (pp. <fpage>27</fpage>-<lpage>55</lpage>). <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Plenum</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Levy, S.</surname></name> (<year>1985</year>). <article-title>Lawful roles of facets in social theories</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>D. Canter</surname></name> (Ed.), <source>Facet theory</source> (pp. <fpage>59</fpage>-<lpage>96</lpage>). <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Springer-Verlag</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Levy, S.</surname></name> (<year>1990</year>). <article-title>The mapping sentence in cumulative theory construction: Well-being as an example</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>J. J. Hox</surname></name> & <name name-style="western"><surname>J. de Jong-Gierveld</surname></name> (Eds.), <source>Operationalization and research strategy</source> (pp. <fpage>155</fpage>-<lpage>177</lpage>). <publisher-loc>Amsterdam</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Swets & Zeitlinger</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Lonner, W. J.</surname></name> (<year>1980</year>). <article-title>The search for psychological universals</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>H. C. Triandis</surname></name> & <name name-style="western"><surname>W. W. Lambert</surname></name> (Eds.), <source>Handbook of cross-cultural psychology, 1: Perspectives</source> (pp. <fpage>143</fpage>-<lpage>204</lpage>). <publisher-loc>Boston</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Allyn & Bacon</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Meeker, B. F.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Elliot, G. C.</surname></name> (<year>1987</year>). <article-title>Counting the costs: Equity and the allocation of negative group products</article-title>. <source>Social Psychology Quarterly</source>, <volume>50</volume>(<issue>1</issue>), <fpage>7</fpage>-<lpage>15</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Mikula, G.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Petri, B.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Tanzer, N.</surname></name> (<year>1990</year>). <article-title>What people regard as unjust: Types and structures of everyday experiences of injustice</article-title>. <source>European Journal of Social Psychology</source>, <volume>20</volume>, <fpage>133</fpage>-<lpage>149</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Miller, D.</surname></name> (<year>1999</year>). <source>Principles of social justice</source>. <publisher-loc>Cambridge, MA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Harvard University Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Miller-Loessi, K.</surname></name> (<year>1995</year>). <article-title>Comparative social psychology: Cross-cultural and cross-national</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>K. S. Cook</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>G. A. Fine</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>J. S. House</surname></name> (Eds.), <source>Sociological perspectives on social psychology</source> (pp. <fpage>397</fpage>-<lpage>420</lpage>). <publisher-loc>Needham Heights, MA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Allyn</publisher-name> & Bacon.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Mills, J.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Clark, M. S.</surname></name> (<year>1982</year>). <article-title>Exchange and communal relationships</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>L. Wheeler</surname></name> (Ed.), <source>Review of personality and social psychology</source> (Vol. 3, pp. <fpage>121</fpage>-<lpage>144</lpage>). <publisher-loc>Beverly Hills, CA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Sage</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Mohr, J. W.</surname></name> (<year>1998</year>). <article-title>Measuring meaning structures</article-title>. <source>Annual Review of Sociology</source>, <volume>24</volume>, <fpage>345</fpage>-<lpage>370</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Parsons, T.</surname></name> (<year>1951</year>). <source>The social system</source>. <publisher-loc>Glencoe, IL</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Free Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Parsons, T.</surname></name> (<year>1959</year>). <article-title>The school as a social system: Some of its functions in American society</article-title>. <source>Harvard Educational Review</source>, <volume>29</volume>, <fpage>297</fpage>-<lpage>318</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Perelman, C.</surname></name> (<year>1967</year>). <source>Justice</source>. <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Random House</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Rawls, J.</surname></name> (<year>1971</year>). <source>A theory of justice</source>. <publisher-loc>Cambridge, MA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Harvard University Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Reis, H. T.</surname></name> (<year>1984</year>). <article-title>The multidimensionality of justice</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>R. Folger</surname></name> (Ed.), <source>The sense of injustice: Social psychological perspectives</source> (pp. <fpage>25</fpage>-<lpage>61</lpage>). <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Plenum</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Sabbagh, C.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Dar, Y.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Resh, N.</surname></name> (<year>1994</year>). <article-title>The structure of social justice judgments: A facet approach</article-title>. <source>Social Psychology Quarterly</source>, <volume>57</volume>(<issue>3</issue>), <fpage>244</fpage>-<lpage>261</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Sabbagh, C.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Schmitt, M.</surname></name> (<year>1998</year>). <article-title>Exploring the structure of positive and negative justice judgments</article-title>. <source>Social Justice Research</source>, <volume>11</volume>(<issue>4</issue>), <fpage>381</fpage>-<lpage>395</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Schmitt, M. (1980). <italic>Justice judgments in distribution decisions: Personal and situational effects</italic>. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Trier, Trier, Germany.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Schmitt, M.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Montada, L.</surname></name> (<year>1982</year>). <article-title>Determinants of experienced justice</article-title>. <source>Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie</source>, <volume>13</volume>, <fpage>32</fpage>-<lpage>44</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Schwartz, S. H.</surname></name> (<year>1992</year>). <article-title>Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>M. P. Zanna</surname></name> (Ed.), <source>Advances in experimental social psychology</source> (Vol. 25, pp. <fpage>1</fpage>-<lpage>65</lpage>). <publisher-loc>Orlando, FL</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Academic Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Schwartz, S. H.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Bardi, A.</surname></name> (<year>2001</year>). <article-title>Value hierarchies across cultures</article-title>. <source>Journalof Cross-Cultural Psychology</source>, <volume>32</volume>(<issue>3</issue>), <fpage>268</fpage>-<lpage>290</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Schwartz, S. H.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Melech, G.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Lehmann, A.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Burgess, S.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Harris, M.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Owens, V.</surname></name> (<year>2001</year>). <article-title>Extending the cross-cultural validity of the theory of basic human values with a different method of measurement</article-title>. <source>Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology</source>, <volume>32</volume>(<issue>5</issue>), <fpage>519</fpage>-<lpage>542</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Shepard, R. N.</surname></name> (<year>1974</year>). <article-title>Representation of structure in similarity data</article-title>. <source>Psychometrika</source>, <volume>39</volume>, <fpage>373</fpage>-<lpage>421</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Siebenhuener, S.</surname></name> (<year>1993</year>). <source>Youth in Saxony</source>. <publisher-loc>Markkleeberg, Germany</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>UFIM German</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Smith, P. B.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Bond, M. H.</surname></name> (<year>1993</year>). <source>Social psychology across cultures</source>. <publisher-loc>Cambridge, UK</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Harvester Wheatsheaf</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Törnblom, K. Y.</surname></name> (<year>1988</year>). <article-title>Positive and negative allocations: A typology and a model for conflicting justice principles</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>E. J. Lawler</surname></name> & <name name-style="western"><surname>B. Markovsky</surname></name> (Eds.), <source>Advances in group processes</source> (Vol.5, pp.<fpage>141</fpage>-<lpage>168</lpage>). <publisher-loc>Greenwich, CT</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>JAI</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Törnblom, K. Y.</surname></name> (<year>1992</year>). <article-title>The social psychology of distributive justice</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>K. R. Scherer</surname></name> (Ed.), <source>Justice: Interdisciplinary perspectives</source> (pp. <fpage>177</fpage>-<lpage>285</lpage>). <publisher-loc>Cambridge, UK</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Cambridge University Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Törnblom, K. Y.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Foa, U. G.</surname></name> (<year>1983</year>). <article-title>Choice of a distribution principle: Crosscultural evidence on the effects of resources</article-title>. <source>Acta Sociologica</source>, <volume>26</volume>(<issue>2</issue>), <fpage>161</fpage>-<lpage>173</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Törnblom, K. Y.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Jonsson, D. R.</surname></name> (<year>1985</year>). <article-title>Subrules of the equality and contribution principles: Their perceived fairness in distribution and retribution</article-title>. <source>Social Psychology Quarterly</source>, <volume>48</volume>(<issue>3</issue>), <fpage>249</fpage>-<lpage>261</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Törnblom, K. Y.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Muehlhausen, S. M.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Jonsson, D. R.</surname></name> (<year>1991</year>). <article-title>The allocation of positive and negative outcomes: When is the equality principle fair for both?</article-title> In <name name-style="western"><surname>R. Vermunt</surname></name> & <name name-style="western"><surname>H. Steensma</surname></name> (Eds.), <source>Social justice in human relations: Societal and psychological origins of justice</source> (Vol. 1, pp. <fpage>59</fpage>-<lpage>99</lpage>). <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Plenum</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Tversky, A.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Kahneman, D.</surname></name> (<year>1987</year>). <article-title>Rational choice and the framing of decisions</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>R. M. Hogarth</surname></name> & <name name-style="western"><surname>M. W. Reder</surname></name> (Eds.), <source>Rational choice: The contrast between economics and psychology</source> (pp. <fpage>67</fpage>-<lpage>94</lpage>). <publisher-loc>Chicago</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>University of Chicago Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Tyler, T. R.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Boeckmann, R. J.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Smith, H. J.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Huo, Y. J.</surname></name> (<year>1997</year>). <source>Social justice in a diverse society</source>. <publisher-loc>Boulder, CO</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Westview</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>van de Vijver, F.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Leung, K.</surname></name> (<year>1997</year>). <source>Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research</source>. <publisher-loc>Thousand Oaks, CA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Sage</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>van de Vijver, F.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Leung, K.</surname></name> (<year>2000</year>). <article-title>Methodological issues in psychological research on culture</article-title>. <source>Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology</source>, <volume>31</volume>, <fpage>35</fpage>-<lpage>51</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Walzer, M.</surname></name> (<year>1983</year>). <source>Spheres of justice</source>. <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Basic Books</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Weber, M.</surname></name> (<year>1947</year>). <article-title>Class, status, and party</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>H. H. Gerth</surname></name> & <name name-style="western"><surname>W. C. Mills</surname></name> (Eds.), <source>From Max Weber: Essays in sociology</source> (n.p.). <publisher-loc>London</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Routledge & Kegan Paul</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Young, F. W.</surname></name> (<year>1984</year>). <article-title>The general Euclidian model</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>H. G. Law</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>C. W. Snyder</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>J. A. Hattie</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>R. P. McDonald</surname></name> (Eds.), <source>Research methods for multimode data analysis</source> (pp. <fpage>440</fpage>-<lpage>469</lpage>). <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Praeger</publisher-name>.</citation></ref></ref-list></back></article></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Toward a Multifaceted Model of the Structure of Social Justice Judgments</title><subTitle>Initial Explorations in Israel and Germany</subTitle></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" lang="en" contentType="CDATA"><title>Toward a Multifaceted Model of the Structure of Social Justice Judgments</title><subTitle>Initial Explorations in Israel and Germany</subTitle></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Clara</namePart><namePart type="family">Sabbagh</namePart><affiliation>University of Haifa, Israel,</affiliation><affiliation>E-mail: csabbagh@construct.haifa.ac.il</affiliation></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="research-article" displayLabel="research-article"></genre><originInfo><publisher>Sage Publications</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Sage CA: Thousand Oaks, CA</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2005-01</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2005</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">This study explores the potential cross-cultural generalizability of a conceptual framework for understanding the multifaceted universe of contents and structure of human social justice judgments (SJJ). The hypothesized framework identifies four elemental facets needed to define SJJ and specifies the types of justice contents people are likely to distinguish when evaluating the justness of a distribution—principles and distributive rules, social resources, sign of the outcome distribution (positive or negative), and the type of social context in which resources are distributed. To empirically verify the fit between the hypothesized structure, smallest space analysis was applied, and earlier findings obtained in an Israeli sample were compared to findings obtained in East and West German samples. Separate replications conducted in the East and West German samples revealed that the multidimensional configurations of SJJ intercorrelations could be partitioned into distinct regions of items that correspond to the facets’ hypothesized elements and their expected arrangements</abstract><subject><genre>keywords</genre><topic>distributive justice</topic><topic>multidimensional scaling</topic><topic>cross-cultural</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal">journal</genre><identifier type="ISSN">0022-0221</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1552-5422</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">JCC</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID-hwp">spjcc</identifier><part><date>2005</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>36</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>1</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>74</start><end>95</end></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">D67E17619E10194325B5C28E2CF14C434026D320</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1177/0022022104271427</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">10.1177_0022022104271427</identifier><recordInfo><recordContentSource>SAGE</recordContentSource></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Rhénanie/explor/UnivTrevesV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001492 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 001492 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Rhénanie
|area= UnivTrevesV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:D67E17619E10194325B5C28E2CF14C434026D320
|texte= Toward a Multifaceted Model of the Structure of Social Justice Judgments
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.31. |  |