I wanted to share this:

Living in a Social World
Psy 324: Advanced Social Psychology
Spring, 1998

Interpersonal Aspects of the Just World Hypothesis
By
Julie Bollmer

"The relationship between goodness and happiness, between wickedness and punishment is so strong that given one of these conditions, the other is frequently assumed. Misfortune, sickness, accident are often taken as signs of badness and guilt. If one is unfortunate, then he has committed a sin." (Heider, 1958, p.235).

This section will focus on the impact that the just world hypothesis can have on our relationships with other people. How we see the world around us can affect how we react to certain situations and events, and consequently how we relate to the people that we encounter. More specifically, whether or not an individual believes that the world is a safe, just place can affect that person’s interpretation of an event, and therefore, impact how that individual relates to the people involved. One area that seems particularly relevant to the just world hypothesis and interpersonal relationships is that of victimization, and more specifically, the victims of rape.

Even though rape is a prevalent crime in our society today, as more than 787,000 women were raped or sexually assaulted in the last two years alone, many rapes still go unreported. This could be, in part, due to the phenomenon of "victim blaming" becoming so common in our society. As the quote at the beginning of this section suggests, individuals who have become the victims of misfortune are often judged by outside observers as being responsible for their own fate. Past research indicates (Lerner and Miller, 1978; Kleinke and Meyer, 1990; Kopper, 1996) that victims of rape, like other victims, are often blamed by others for their misfortune. Research has shown that the phenomenon of blaming rape victims is related in part to rape myth acceptance (Burt, 1980; Kopper, 1996) and a belief in a just world (Lerner and Miller, 1978; Kleinke and Meyer, 1996). [photo courtesy of No Safe Place and PBS]

Individuals that have a strong belief in a just world can have this belief challenged when they encounter a victim of random misfortune such as a rape victim. The individual wants to believe that the world is a safe, just place where people get what they deserve and deserve what they get. Even when evidence suggests otherwise, the individual is very reluctant to give up this belief that the world is not just. In the face of contradicting evidence, research suggests (Kleinke and Meyer, 1996) that people with a high belief in a just world will do one of two things: either they will try to eliminate the suffering of the innocent victims or else they will derogate them for their fate. Since it is impossible to reverse the crime of rape, and thus relieve the victim of her suffering, the rape victim is often subjected to derogation and blame. In this manner, the person who believes in a just world can maintain this belief as there is no longer a suffering person, but a woman who deserves her misfortune. The individual may blame the victim on any number of dimensions including her clothing (i.e. revealing blouse, short skirt, etc.), her behavior, (i.e. drinking, flirting, etc.) or her personality (i.e. she is a liar, she wanted attention, etc.). Many of these attributions are supported and perpetuated by the acceptance of cultural rape myths by our society (Burt, 1980). In this manner, the person who believes in a just world can sufficiently maintain the belief in a culturally acceptable way as, in the eyes of our society, there is no longer an innocent victim, but a woman who is deserving of her fate.

It must be noted, however, that belief in a just world does not always mean derogation and blaming of the victim. Lerner and Miller (1978) suggest that at least three factors must be present in order for a victim to be derogated by an outsider. First, the authors argue that the victim must be seen as an innocent victim in order for derogation to occur. If victims can easily be seen as responsible for causing their suffering, then there is no need to derogate them because there is no violation of the just world hypothesis. The victim acted in a manner that brought about the resulting fate and this is in line with what a belief in a just world emphasizes: people get what they deserve. On the other hand, an innocent victim, one who can not be readily blamed for the resulting fate, violates the belief in a just world and is subjected to derogation.

The authors argue that a second factor that can affect the derogation of a victim by someone who believes in a just world is the attractiveness or status of the victim. Their research suggests that victims who are highly attractive or that enjoy a particularly high status are derogated less than less attractive or lower status victims. A possible explanation for this discrepancy is empathy felt for the victim. The observer’s attention is focused on what external factors could have caused the event to occur instead of the victim’s characteristics. In this case, there is no need to derogate or blame the victim.

Finally, the authors argue that belief in a just world will not lead tocandle2.jpg (5031 bytes) victim derogation when the observer sees some similarities with the victim. For example, Kleinke and Meyer (1990) found that women, regardless of their belief in a just world, tend not to blame or derogate victims of rape. Men’s belief in a just world, however, is strongly correlated with victim derogation. The explanation given for these gender differences is that women feel that they have similarities with the rape victim just by being women. The women concentrate more on the external forces that brought about the rape because these are the same forces that could cause the event to happen to female observers. The women empathize with the female victim and do not derogate her regardless of their belief in a just world. Men, on the other hand, have a harder time placing themselves in the victim’s situation, resulting in a lack of empathy for the victim. As a result, the male’s belief in a just world is a good prediction of whether or not the victim will be blamed or derogated. [graphic courtesy of Canadian Women's Internet Association]

In conclusion, the just world hypothesis asserts that a world is a safe, just place where people get what they deserve and deserve what they get. This belief can affect our interpersonal relationships as a belief in a just world can be challenged by innocent victims or people who do not seem to deserve their misfortune. When an observer’s beliefs are contradicted, the belief in a just world can be restored by derogating the "innocent" victim. Placing the blame on victims makes it seem as though the victims are getting what they deserve, and that the world is a just place after all.

More on the:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">The Just World Theory

By Claire Andre and Manuel Velasquez

Afterwards, they said that the 22-year-old woman was bound to attract attention. She was wearing a white lace miniskirt, a green tank top, and no underwear. At knife-point, she was kidnapped from a Fort Lauderdale restaurant parking lot by a Georgia drifter and raped twice. But a jury showed little sympathy for the victim. The accused rapist was acquitted. "We all feel she asked for it [by] the way she was dressed," said the jury foreman.

The verdict of the jurors in the Fort Lauderdale rape trial may have been influenced by a widespread tendency to believe that victims of misfortune deserve what happens to them. The need to see victims as the recipients of their just deserts can be explained by what psychologists call the Just World Hypothesis. According to the hypothesis, people have a strong desire or need to believe that the world is an orderly, predictable, and just place, where people get what they deserve. Such a belief plays an important function in our lives since in order to plan our lives or achieve our goals we need to assume that our actions will have predictable consequences. Moreover, when we encounter evidence suggesting that the world is not just, we quickly act to restore justice by helping the victim or we persuade ourselves that no injustice has occurred. We either lend assistance or we decide that the rape victim must have asked for it, the homeless person is simply lazy, the fallen star must be an adulterer. These attitudes are continually reinforced in the ubiquitous fairy tales, fables, comic books, cop shows and other morality tales of our culture, in which good is always rewarded and evil punished.

Melvin Lerner, a social psychologist, has conducted a series of experiments to test this hypothesis. In an impressive body of research, he documents people's eagerness to convince themselves that beneficiaries deserve their benefits and victims their suffering. In a 1965 study, Lerner reported that subjects who were told that a fellow student had won a cash prize in a lottery tended to believe that the student worked harder than another student who lost the lottery. In another study a year later, Lerner and a colleague videotaped a simulated "learning" experiment in which it appeared that the "participants" were subjected to electric shocks. Lerner found that subjects who observed the videotapes tended to form much lower opinions of these "victimized" participants when there was no possibility of the victim finding relief from the ordeal, or when the victim took on the role of "martyr" by voluntarily remaining in the experiment despite the apparent unpleasantness of the experience. Lerner concluded that "the sight of an innocent person suffering without possibility of reward or compensation motivated people to devalue the attractiveness of the victim in order to bring about a more appropriate fit between her fate and her character."

If the belief in a just world simply resulted in humans feeling more comfortable with the universe and its capriciousness, it would not be a matter of great concern for ethicists or social scientists. But Lerner's Just World Hypothesis, if correct, has significant social implications. The belief in a just world may undermine a commitment to justice.

Zick Rubin of Harvard University and Letitia Anne Peplau of UCLA have conducted surveys to examine the characteristics of people with strong beliefs in a just world. They found that people who have a strong tendency to believe in a just world also tend to be more religious, more authoritarian, more conservative, more likely to admire political leaders and existing social institutions, and more likely to have negative attitudes toward underprivileged groups. To a lesser but still significant degree, the believers in a just world tend to "feel less of a need to engage in activities to change society or to alleviate plight of social victims."

Ironically, then, the belief in a just world may take the place of a genuine commitment to justice. For some people, it is simply easier to assume that forces beyond their control mete out justice. When that occurs, the result may be the abdication of personal responsibility, acquiescence in the face of suffering and misfortune, and indifference towards injustice. Taken to the extreme, indifference can result in the institutionalization of injustice. Still, the need to believe that the world is just can also be a positive force. The altruism of volunteers and of heroes who risk their lives to help strangers in need is a result of people trying to restore justice to insure that the world remains just. As Melvin Lerner writes, "We have persuasive evidence that people are strongly motivated by the desire to eliminate suffering of innocent victims."

Neither science nor psychology has satisfactorily answered the question of why the need to view the world as just exerts such a powerful influence on human behavior and the human psyche. But the research suggests that humans have a need to bring their beliefs about what is right into conformity with the objective reality they encounter--and that they will work to achieve consistency either by modifying their beliefs or attempting to modify that reality. By becoming more conscious of our own tendencies, we may be more inclined to take the latter approach.

The need to see victims as the recipients of their just deserts can be explained by what psychologists call the "Just World Hypothesis."

Further reading:

Melvin J. Lerner, The Belief in a Just World: A Fundamental Delusion, (New York: Plenum Press, 1980).

Melvin J. Lerner and Sally C. Lerner, editors, The Justice Motivce in Social Behavior: Adapting to Times of Scarcity and Change, (New York: Plenum Press, 1981).

Zick Rubin and Letita Anne Peplau, "Who Believes in a Just World," Journal of SOcial Issues, Vol. 31, No. 3, 1975, pp. 65-89.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by MelodyLane:
<strong> Sue, yes, folks do outgrow each other. It happened to you before and is likely to happen to you again. And unfortunately, in your situation, since you are married to a cheater the chances of adultery in your marriage is quite great. What he did with you, he will do to you. Easy come, easy go. Marriages started with affairs have about a 3% chance of surviving because the partners are about as trustworthy as alley cats in heat.

I see unfortunately you have been badly hurt, however that is your ex and not everyone is alike...l can also imagine that if you have been betrayed by your ex you are unwilling to accept that 2nd marriages work...l have 1st hand knowlege of childrens views of divorces being just that however my father and stepmother have just celebrated their silver wedding as l will one day and it is plain to see as it is with me that they are as happy as can be l realise it doesn't happen all the time but it does happen and believing you should stay together for the childrens sake is just plain cruel to the children, children want parents who are happy cos they are the ones who love them and the biggest thing they want? parents who do not slag each other off .

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">where we should be which is together,our children are seeing parents who love each other and how love should be rather than parents who just stay together unhappily and transmit this to the children</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Children are always devastated and damaged by divorce and adultery. Children don't give a damn if you are "in love" or are "happy," they care about THEIR HAPPINESS. Their happiness comes from being with THEIR PARENTS, who love THEM, not from seeing their parent with some affair partner they picked up off the street.

this would be easy if this was the case...as my son put it very eloquently,"from my point of view l have 4 people who care for me, 4 people who look out for me and 4 lots of presents!"........he's one well adjusted lad....mainly cos he hasn't had parents who have messed him about.....he knows who his "birth" parents are and he loves them best of all but he certainly also loves seeing his parents happy

Please don't delude yourself into ever thinking that affairs and divorce are ever good for children. Children from BAD marriages do better psychologically than children from broken homes. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">maybe in the states that is the case...here in europe it is completely the opposite....l notice the religious quotes you put in...maybe that has more bearing on your thinking than you are aware or wish to admit...openmindeness is seen as a quality here....
Sue

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">maybe in the states that is the case...here in europe it is completely the opposite....l notice the religious quotes you put in...maybe that has more bearing on your thinking than you are aware or wish to admit...openmindeness is seen as a quality here....
Sue [/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Sue, but I didn't post any religious quotes. My point is that divorce is universally devastating to children. Children don't care about your happiness, they care about THEIR happiness. Thier happiness is derived from living with THEIR parents.

And I don't care where you live, marriages based on deceit and fraud with decietful people are not likely to survive. That is a universal truth based on simple common sense.

What exactly would you like me to be "open minded" about? Why not clarify what you mean?

[/QB][/QUOTE]Sue, but I didn't post any religious quotes. My point is that divorce is universally devastating to children.

And I don't care where you live, marriages based on deceit and fraud with decietful people are not likely to survive. That is a universal truth based on simple common sense.

What exactly would you like me to be "open minded" about? Why not clarify what you mean? [/QB][/QUOTE]

hmm... It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise, than for a man to hear the song of fools.
Ecclesiastes 7:5 strange l thought this was a religious quote!!

"Children don't care about your happiness, they care about THEIR happiness"
true
." Thier happiness is derived from living with THEIR parents."

this is not the case....children are happy when given what they "want" or perceive as need...this traditionally has been provided by their parents but does not have to be,my stepdaughter for instance has only ever known myself and my husband as being together,she loves both of us and easily and happily accepts our part in her life because she gets what she wants from us which is love,time and attention.

l fully realise that if you have been betrayed and had your trust in your partner shaken as you have then it is against your mindset to hold an openmind that a marriage breakup can have a happy and fullfilling outcome for both parties,my former husband is still a close friend and we have since discussed my meeting my husband and decision to be with him, after l left he realised he understood how l felt when he then met someone who he is now married to and any residual anger dissipated within moments....

l wish you well...l truly hope your relationship has been turned around and continues on a good path...

Sue

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by susanbythesea:
[QB]

l fully realise that if you have been betrayed and had your trust in your partner shaken as you have then it is against your mindset to hold an openmind that a marriage breakup can have a happy and fullfilling outcome for both parties,</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Susan,I am open minded to the truth and would suggest you try the same because I don't see much here. I think it probably helps you to believe that your affair was a happy event for all involved, but the fact remains that divorce is devastating. It is devastating to the partners involved and to the children. Psyhologists put the trauma of divorce in the same category as the death of a child.

Now, perhaps your XH is happy to be parted with you, however, the fact remains that a) divorce is devastating and b) a marriage founded on deceit by deceitful people is not likely to last. What your H did with you, he will do TO you. I hate to tell you that, but this is your likely fate. Marriages based on deceit and lies just do not last.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Children don't care about your happiness, they care about THEIR happiness"
true
." Thier happiness is derived from living with THEIR parents."

this is not the case....children are happy when given what they "want" or perceive as need...</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">This is wishful thinking. What children "need" are their mom and dad. As I stated earlier, children from BAD home environments do better than children from broken homes. You may want to believe otherwise, but the facts just don't support you. Again, children care about their own happiness, they don't give a damn about your happiness.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Now, perhaps your XH is happy to be parted with you, however, the fact remains that a) divorce is devastating and b) a marriage founded on deceit by deceitful people is not likely to last. What your H did with you, he will do TO you. I hate to tell you that, but this is your likely fate. Marriages based on deceit and lies just do not last. </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">

unfortunately unless either of us return here 20 years down the line we will not know who's marriage stayed happy but l'm content with the way mine is so....



..</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">This is wishful thinking. What children "need" are their mom and dad. As I stated earlier, children from BAD home environments do better than children from broken homes. You may want to believe otherwise, but the facts just don't support you. Again, children care about their own happiness, they don't give a damn about your happiness. [/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">so by parents do you mean"birth parents"?and if that is the case what about adopted children?..........as l have previously stated l far preferred to live with my father and stepmum than either my unhappy mother or unhappy birth parents together......l do not believe children should live in BAD home environments do you? and an unhappy home is a bad home...how do you teach a child how to love someone if they are in a home without love?
I am sure you do not wish to believe you're husband will stray again but by your own analogy he is very likely to if he has already...so if you believe that how are things different?....was he a serial adulterer? and if not why did he stray but ultimately not leave ? was it an 'unimportant" affair? and how do you reconcile his decision to cheat or to stay?...l am very curious...

Sue

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">so by parents do you mean"birth parents"?and if that is the case what about adopted children?..........as l have previously stated l far preferred to live with my father and stepmum than either my unhappy mother or unhappy birth parents together......l do not believe children should live in BAD home environments do you?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Children should not have to suffer the trauma of a broken home. Children never recover from divorce. Studies show that they suffer in every measure over children that are even from BAD environments. Children from bad home environments do better then children from broken homes.

I'm not sure what you are getting at about adopted children. Adopted children are not different from non-adopted children. They suffer from divorce just like other children.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> and an unhappy home is a bad home...how do you teach a child how to love someone if they are in a home without love?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I don't think you demonstrate it by having affairs and breaking up families, do you? Unless 2 alley cats in heat is your idea of "love." Rather, love is a COMMITTMENT to your family, not your latest feeling de' jour. You teach children love by demonstrating your committment to THEM, rather than some sleazy stud.


</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> I am sure you do not wish to believe you're husband will stray again but by your own analogy he is very likely to if he has already...so if you believe that how are things different?....was he a serial adulterer? and if not why did he stray but ultimately not leave ? was it an 'unimportant" affair? and how do you reconcile his decision to cheat or to stay?...l am very curious...</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">The difference between my H and yours is that my H ENDED his affair. Yours did not. Mine is remorseful and made amends for his mistake. Yours does not even acknowledge he made a mistake in the first place. That is a huge difference from a WS who ended his affair and showed remorse.

See, I have strong reason to believe that my H would never commit adultery again because of his actions afterwards, you have no such assurance. Your H is still conducting his affair and sees nothing wrong with it. He believes it is ok to dump his current family for his latest "love." He has shown you this. What he did to his last wife, he feels perfectly free to do to you.

See, your marriage was started on a "feeling" rather than a committment. And what was started on a feeling can quickly END on a feeling when he develops those "feelings" for another. Feelings change every day; all couples fall in and out of love over the years.

But what would stop your H from leaving? He doesn't think there is anything wrong with adultery. I will just say it again, Sue, what he did WITH YOU, he will do to you. Doesn't that make you sort of nervous?

[ [/QUOTE]
I'm not sure what you are getting at about adopted children. Adopted children are not different from non-adopted children. They suffer from divorce just like other children.QUOTE]

my comment s about adoptive children were not referring to divorce, by your rationale all children are better of with their birth parents, even if in the case of many adopted children they are not wanted, l do not believe this to be the case

[/QUOTE]I don't think you demonstrate it by having affairs and breaking up families, do you? Unless 2 alley cats in heat is your idea of "love." Rather, love is a COMMITTMENT to your family, not your latest feeling de' jour. You teach children love by demonstrating your committment to THEM, rather than some sleazy stud.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">

*grin* l realise you have a slightly "biased" view of all men,l am sure hubby will be highly amused to be referred to as a sleazy stud!

QUOTE]The difference between my H and yours is that my H ENDED his affair. Yours did not. Mine is remorseful and made amends for his mistake. Yours does not even acknowledge he made a mistake in the first place. That is a huge difference from a WS who ended his affair and showed remorse.

See, I have strong reason to believe that my H would never commit adultery again because of his actions afterwards, you have no such assurance. Your H is still conducting his affair and sees nothing wrong with it. He believes it is ok to dump his current family for his latest "love." He has shown you this. What he did to his last wife, he feels perfectly free to do to you.

I am presuming by this that your husband is not or at least as far as you know not a serial adulterer ,l truly hope this is the case

But what would stop your H from leaving? He doesn't think there is anything wrong with adultery. I will just say it again, Sue, what he did WITH YOU, he will do to you. Doesn't that make you sort of nervous? [/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I am concerned that you are so focused on the husband straying.....seems to inadvertantly show huge insecurities about your own relationship despit your protestations and l guess not surprisingly as unlike myself whose husband has never cheated on ME, your husband has cheated on you once already and l guess if he cheats ON YOU once how do you really know he won't do it again??...honestly??.......

anyhow as l run far too busy a business to read boards very often and l am sure you will wish to have the last word *grin* l will leave the closing comment to you and continue in my happy little life

Sue

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by susanbythesea:
[QB]

my comment s about adoptive children were not referring to divorce, by your rationale all children are better of with their birth parents, even if in the case of many adopted children they are not wanted, l do not believe this to be the case</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I never said it was the case. The issue is not adopted children.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I am concerned that you are so focused on the husband straying.....seems to inadvertantly show huge insecurities about your own relationship despit your protestations and l guess not surprisingly as unlike myself whose husband has never cheated on ME, your husband has cheated on you once already and l guess if he cheats ON YOU once how do you really know he won't do it again??...honestly??.......</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Then why are you here protesting so much, Sue? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

Who would you trust more? The bank robber who still robs banks or the bank robber who gave it up years ago and is remorseful? Who would you give the keys to the bank?

I think the difference is pretty obvious to those with an open mind, Sue.

I wish you the best; you will need it. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />