jagomart
digital resources
picture1_Personality Pdf 96353 | Meansends


 159x       Filetype PDF       File size 0.13 MB       Source: lskitka.people.uic.edu


File: Personality Pdf 96353 | Meansends
personality and social psychology bulletin http psp sagepub com do the means always justify the ends or do the ends sometimes justify the means a value protection model of justice ...

icon picture PDF Filetype PDF | Posted on 20 Sep 2022 | 3 years ago
Partial capture of text on file.
             Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 
                                                             http://psp.sagepub.com
          Do the Means Always Justify the Ends, or Do the Ends Sometimes Justify the Means? A Value
                                                 Protection Model of Justice Reasoning  
                                                                    Linda J. Skitka 
                                                       Pers Soc Psychol Bull 2002; 28; 588 
                                                        DOI: 10.1177/0146167202288003 
                                               The online version of this article can be found at: 
                                             http://psp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/28/5/588
                                                                     Published by: 
                                                            http://www.sagepublications.com
                                                                      On behalf of: 
                                                  Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc. 
                        Additional services and information for Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin can be found at: 
                                                     Email Alerts: http://psp.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts 
                                                  Subscriptions: http://psp.sagepub.com/subscriptions 
                                                 Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav 
                                             Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav 
                                                   Citations (this article cites 17 articles hosted on the 
                                                  SAGE Journals Online and HighWire Press platforms):
                                                     http://psp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/28/5/588 
                                                   Downloaded from http://psp.sagepub.com at Univ of Illinois at Chicago Library on April 2, 2008 
                                      © 2002 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 
                                                            PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY BULLETIN
                                                            Skitka / MEANS AND ENDS
                                                                                    Do the Means Always Justify the Ends, or
                                                                                    Do the Ends Sometimes Justify the Means?
                                                                                    A Value Protection Model of Justice Reasoning
                                                                                    Linda J. Skitka
                                                                                    University of Illinois at Chicago
                                                                                    This study explored whether personal identity concerns relate in                                                                                                                                                                                                  good about themselves, and are motivated to maintain
                                                                                    important ways to how people decide whether an event is fair or                                                                                                                                                                                                   favorableself-appraisals,becausedownwardshiftsinself-
                                                                                    unfair.Becausemoralmandatesareselectiveexpressionsofval-                                                                                                                                                                                                          appraisals lead to anxiety, depression, anger, and other
                                                                                    ues that are central to people’s sense of personal identity, people                                                                                                                                                                                               formsofnegativeaffect(Heatherton&Polivy,1991;Hig-
                                                                                    shouldbehighlymotivatedtoprotectthesepositionsfrompossible                                                                                                                                                                                                        gins, 1987). Self-affirmation theory (Steele, 1988)
                                                                                    threat.Consistent with predictions based on a value protection                                                                                                                                                                                                    emphasizes the idea that people strive for congruence
                                                                                    model of justice, whether people had a moral mandate on abor-                                                                                                                                                                                                     betweentheirpersonalmoralvaluesandtheirthoughts
                                                                                    tion, civil rights, or immigration was completely independent of                                                                                                                                                                                                  and behavior because lack of congruence leads to feel-
                                                                                    the perceived procedural fairness of political institutions when                                                                                                                                                                                                  ings of inauthenticity. Whenever people experience a
                                                                                    thoseinstitutionsposednosalientthreattothesepolicyconcerns.                                                                                                                                                                                                       threat to their personal identity by failing to live up to
                                                                                    However, strength of moral mandate, and not prethreat judg-                                                                                                                                                                                                       their moral standards, they will be highly motivated to
                                                                                    mentsofproceduralfairnessoftheSupremeCourtorastaterefer-                                                                                                                                                                                                          actinwaysthatallowforpublicandprivatereaffirmation
                                                                                    endum, predicted perceived procedural fairness, outcome fair-                                                                                                                                                                                                     ofthebeliefthattheyareauthenticallymoral.Similarto
                                                                                    ness, decision acceptance, and other indices of moral outrage                                                                                                                                                                                                     Sir ThomasMore(whopreferredtobebeheadedrather
                                                                                    wheneithertheSupremeCourtorastatereferendumposedapos-                                                                                                                                                                                                             thansanctiondivorce),peoplevaluetheself-respectand
                                                                                    sible threat to perceivers’ moral mandates.                                                                                                                                                                                                                       the self-satisfaction that comes with living up to and
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      defending their internalized moral standards and often
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      will defend their moral positions even in the face of
                                                                                    Currentpsychologicaltheoriesofjusticearebasedon                                                                                                                                                                                                                   extremecostsfordoingso(Bandura,1986).Therefore,
                                                                                    the premise that people care about justice and fairness                                                                                                                                                                                                           peoplearelikelytosometimesjudgewhethereventsare
                                                                                    primarily because of their social identity needs. People
                                                                                    are theorized to be especially attentive to information                                                                                                                                                                                                           Author’s Note: This research was supported by a grant from the Na-
                                                                                    related to procedural fairness because the procedural                                                                                                                                                                                                             tional Science Foundation(NSF-SBR#96-17861).Thestaff(andespe-
                                                                                    actions of institutions and authorities communicate                                                                                                                                                                                                               cially Robin Bebel) at the Public Opinion Laboratory deserves
                                                                                    important information about social worth and value to                                                                                                                                                                                                             recognitionfortheirprofessionalexecutionofthesurvey.JohnDarley,
                                                                                    involved parties (see Cropanzano & Greenberg, 1997,                                                                                                                                                                                                               Robert Folger, Wendy Gardner, David Houston, Melvin Lerner, Wil-
                                                                                    for a review). It is theorized here that people are moti-                                                                                                                                                                                                         liam McCready, Elizabeth Mullen, Joe Oppenheimer, Philip Tetlock,
                                                                                    vated to similarly affirm and protect their sense of per-                                                                                                                                                                                                         KeesvandenBos,andmyanonymousreviewershaveallaskedthought-
                                                                                    sonalidentityandthatpersonalidentityneedsalsohave                                                                                                                                                                                                                 fulquestionsandprovidedusefulfeedbackonthemoralmandatecon-
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      struct, earlier drafts of this article, or both. Earlier versions of this
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    -
                                                                                    an important influence on why and how people decide                                                                                                                                                                                                               research were presented at the International Society for Justice Re
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    -
                                                                                    somethingisfairorunfairandtheconsequencesofmak-                                                                                                                                                                                                                   searchmeetinginRishonLeZion,Israel,2000,andtheSocietyforEx
                                                                                    ing that judgment.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                perimental Social Psychology meeting, Atlanta, Georgia, 2000.
                                                                                                There are a number of reasons to believe that per-                                                                                                                                                                                                    Correspondence about this article should be addressed to Linda J.
                                                                                    sonal identity—and particularly the need to maintain a                                                                                                                                                                                                            Skitka, Department of Psychology (M/C 285), University of Illinois at
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Chicago, Chicago, IL 60607-7137; e-mail: lskitka@uic.edu.
                                                                                    positivepersonalidentity—hasaconnectiontohowpeo-                                                                                                                                                                                                                  PSPB, Vol. 28 No. 5, May 2002 588-597
                                                                                    ple think about fairness. People generally like to feel                                                                                                                                                                                                           © 2002 by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      588
                                                                                                                                                                                                          Downloaded from http://psp.sagepub.com at Univ of Illinois at Chicago Library on April 2, 2008 
                                                                                                                                                      © 2002 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 
                                                                                                           Skitka / MEANS AND ENDS             589
                      fair or unfair against the yardstick of their internalized      towardtheworld.Moralmandatesareconceivedasrep-
                      moral values.                                                   resentingaspecialclassofstrongattitudes,wherestrong
                                                                                      attitudes are defined in terms of extremity and impor-
                      INTRODUCING A VALUE PROTECTION                                  tance (e.g., Boninger, Krosnick, Berent, & Fabrigar,
                      MODEL OF JUSTICE REASONING                                      1995; Krosnick, 1988) and/or attitude extremity and
                                                                                      certainty (e.g., Gross, Holtz, & Miller, 1995). Strong atti-
                         To attempt to account for how personal identity              tudesrepresenttheclassofattitudesthatareparticularly
                      relates to how people decide whether something is fair          stable, consequential, and difficult to change (Hovland,
                      or unfair, a value protection model was developed that          1959; Hyman & Sheatsley, 1947). Moral mandates also
                      makes the following predictions: (a) Given that moral           are characterized by attitude strength, importance, and
                      values are central to personal identity (Rokeach, 1973),        certainty but include the additional layer of moral con-
                      people should be motivated to affirm their sense of self        viction. Therefore, all moral mandates are strong atti-
                      by selectively endorsing self-expressive moral positions        tudes, but not all strong attitudes are moral mandates.
                      or stands, or what will be referred to as moral mandates            Moral mandates result from heavily internalized
                      (i.e.,“ToknowwhoIamistoknowwhereIstand,”Taylor,                 norms(e.g.,“thoushallnotkill”)andpersonalcommit-
                      1989); (b) a commitment to a moral mandate allows               menttoterminalvalues,suchasfreedom,equality,orthe
                      perceivers to classify the actions of institutions, authori-    sanctity of life (Rokeach, 1973). Moral mandates are
                      ties, ingroup or outgroup members, and even them-               related to and consistent with Judd and Krosnick’s
                      selves into the mutually exclusive categories of legiti-        (1989) notion of “crowning moral values” (i.e., those
                      matethoughtordeedversusfundamentaltransgression.                that trump other possibly relevant moral standards or
                      Therefore, outcomes and procedures will be perceived            values) and with Locke’s (1991) emphasis on values as
                      as legitimate and fair if they are consistent with              the motivational force that drives individual reasoning
                      perceivers’moralmandatesandwillbeperceivedasille-               and choice.
                      gitimate and unfair if they are inconsistent with                   Although moral mandates are rooted in core moral
                      perceivers’ moral mandates; and (c) thinking about,             values,moralmandatesarenotvaluesperse.Moralman-
                      experiencing, witnessing, or behaving in a way that vio-        datesaretheselectiveexpressionofacoremoralvalueor
                      latesamoralmandateshouldbethreateningtopeople’s                 values. The emphasis on selective expression is impor-
                      sense of both private and public personal identity. Peo-        tant. For example, even though there are many policy
                      ple will be motivated to protect their sense of personal        positions that people should theoretically endorse if
                      identity when threatened and will do so by making a             they have a strong commitment to the value of equality,
                      number of cognitive, affective, and behavioral adjust-          weknowthatpeoplearecognitivemisers(Fiske&Taylor,
                      ments, all of which have implications for whether they          1996)whorarelyhaveperfectlyconstrainedideological
                      will feel events are fair or unfair. Defense strategies will    belief systems (Converse, 1964). Most people choose a
                      primarily include moral outrage and moral cleansing             finite number of strong moral positions to represent
                      (cf. Tetlock, Kristel, Elson, & Lerner, 2000). In the case      theircommitmenttoagivenvalue.Forexample,ifsome-
                      of a personal transgression of a moral mandate, moral           onedeeplyvaluesthesanctityoflifeandseestheircom-
                      outrage will typically involve self-blame, self-loathing,       mitment to this value as a reflection of themselves as a
                      and guilt. When people think about or experience a              decent and moral person, they may selectively express
                      transgression of a moral mandate by others, moral out-          this commitment through a pro-life position on abor-
                      ragewilltypicallyinvolvenegativeattributionsaboutthe            tion. Having a moral position could well be psychologi-
                      transgressor(s)thatinturnleadtoaperceptionofinjus-              cally sufficient for people to persuade themselves that
                      tice, anger and contempt, negative sanctions, and/or            they are authentic moral beings. Once an expression of
                      protest. Simplythinkingabout,muchlessexperiencing,              theircommitmenttoaspecificvaluehasbeenidentified,
                      the violation of a moral mandate on the part of self or         peoplemayfeellittlepressuretodevelopotherattitudes
                      others should lead people to experience moral outrage           around that same value (e.g., to also be against capital
                      and to engage in moral cleansing (i.e., behaviors and           punishment). Therefore, even though values are the
                      thoughtsdirectedtowardreaffirmingone’ssenseofself               personal ideals that provide moral mandates with their
                      as a good person).                                              motivational force, an attachment to a specific moral
                                                                                      value may or may not lead to a logically constrained
                      MORAL MANDATES                                                  belief system or a specific set of moral mandates.
                         People are not expected to have moral mandates to
                      guide their thoughts, feelings, and behaviors in every          ALTERNATIVE THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES
                      context. A moral mandate is a selective self-expressive             In contrast to the value protection model’s emphasis
                      stand on a specific issue, not a generalized orientation        on connections between personal identity needs and
                                                   Downloaded from http://psp.sagepub.com at Univ of Illinois at Chicago Library on April 2, 2008 
                                      © 2002 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 
                      590     PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY BULLETIN
                      howpeopledecide whether something is fair or unfair,               tant reference points besides procedures will shape
                      other current theories of justice emphasize the role of            people’sjustice judgmentswhenthatinformationissuf-
                      two different, but nonetheless self-related, motivations           ficiently available to perceivers. I propose that moral
                      for why people care about justice: (a) because it serves           mandates may be one important reference point that
                      theirmaterialinterests(theinstrumentalapproach;e.g.,               people use to decide whether outcomes—and proce-
                      Adams, 1963; Thibaut & Walker, 1975; Walster,                      dures—are fair or unfair.
                      Berscheid, & Walster, 1973) or (b) because it serves a
                      social identity function (e.g., the group value and rela-          THE PRESENT STUDY
                      tional models of justice; see Lind & Tyler, 1988; Tyler &              Because moral mandates are selective expressions of
                      Lind, 1992). Instrumental models of justice posit that             moral values that are central to people’s sense of per-
                      people care about justice because it serves their long-            sonalidentity,peoplewillbehighlymotivatedtoprotect
                      term self-interest. For example, people care about                 thesepositionsfrompossiblethreat.Therefore,aproce-
                      whethertheyhavevoiceindecisionsbecauseitallowsfor                  dural failure to uphold a moral mandate will be per-
                      greater control over what happens and therefore a                  ceived to be a form of personal affront and will shape
                      higher probability of a positive outcome (Thibaut &                people’s subsequent reactions to both the outcome and
                      Walker, 1975).                                                     the procedure used to decide it. Based on this premise,
                          In contrast, social identity theories of justice argue         the present study tested the following two hypotheses.
                      that perceptions of fairness are shaped primarily by the
                      characteristics of procedures because procedures con-                  Hypothesis 1: The strength of a moral mandate will not be
                      veyinformationaboutsocialstanding(e.g.,Lind&Tyler,                        related to the perceived fairness of relevant procedures
                      1988; Tyler & Lind, 1992). People are expected to be                      when there is no salient real or imagined threat to the
                      moreinterestedinhavingtheirsocialstandingvalidated                        moral mandate. However, strength of moral mandate
                      byfairtreatmentthantheyareintheoutcomesthatpro-                           will be negatively related to perceived procedural fair-
                      cedures yield. Consistent with this idea, considerable                    ness under threat. Even an imagined threat to a moral
                      research has found that people are more accepting of                      mandate(e.g.,ifamorallymandatedpro-choiceperson
                      negativeorunfavorableoutcomeswhentheyarearrived                           thinksaboutthepossibilityoftheSupremeCourtruling
                      at by fair procedures (the “fair process effect”; e.g.,                   to overturn Roe v.Wade) should lead to derogation of
                      Cohen, 1985; Folger, Rosenfield, Grove, & Cockran,                        procedural fairness.
                      1979; Greenberg & Folger, 1983; Van den Bos, Wilke,                    Hypothesis2:Theimpactofproceduralfairnessonoutcome
                      Lind, & Vermunt, 1998).                                                   judgments (e.g., outcome fairness and moral outrage)
                          Proponents of fairness heuristic theory (see Lind,                    will be mitigated (or eliminated) when people have a
                                                                                                strong moral mandate. In other words, when decisions
                      Kulik, Ambrose, & de Vera Park, 1993; Van den Bos,                        are made in a morally mandated context, outcome fair-
                      Lind,Vermunt,&Wilke,1997;VandenBos,Vermunt,&                              ness and moral outrage will be determined primarily by
                      Wilke, 1997) suggest that the fair process effect may be                  theperceiver’sstrengthofmoralmandate,aneffectthat
                      the result of more general cognitive processes rather                     will not be qualified by whether the perceiver believed
                      than reflecting of people’s social identity needs. For                    theproceduretobefairorunfairbeforethethreat.Simi-
                      example, people often learn about procedures before                       larly, whenoutcomesvalidatetheperceiver’smoralman-
                      they learn about outcomes. By the time outcome infor-                     date, their sense of justice done will not be based on
                                                                                                whethertheybelievedtheproceduretobefairorunfair
                      mation is learned, it may be colored and biased in the                    in an outcome-neutralcontextbutinsteadwillbepredi-
                      direction of an already carefully constructed judgment                    cated primarily, if not solely, by the strength of the per-
                      of procedural fairness. Supporting the hypothesis that                    son’s moral mandate. In short, when one has a moral
                      what matters most is what people learn first, Van den                     mandate, any means will justify the mandated end.
                      Bos, Vermunt, and Wilke (1997) found weaker fair pro-
                      cesseffectswhenpeoplelearnedaboutoutcomesbefore                        Totest these hypotheses, people’s reactions to either
                      they learned about procedures. In addition, research               the Supreme Court or a state referendum were exam-
                      testing fairness heuristic theory predictions also has             ined under two different conditions: under no threat
                      found that people rely primarily on standards such as              and under a threat to specific moral mandates.
                      social-comparison-basedequityinformationwhenform-
                      ing fairness judgments about outcomes and it is only               METHOD
                      whensocial comparison information is absent that they              Participants
                      use procedural information as a heuristic replacement
                      for it in forming outcome fairness judgments (Lind                     A random-digit-dialed (RDD) panel sample of 521
                      etal.,1993;VandenBosetal.,1998).Insum,thefairness                                                                   1
                                                                                         adults, representing a 58.5% response rate, responded
                      heuristicprogramofresearchsuggeststhatotherimpor-                  to a telephone survey on two occasions (once under no
                                                     Downloaded from http://psp.sagepub.com at Univ of Illinois at Chicago Library on April 2, 2008 
                                       © 2002 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 
The words contained in this file might help you see if this file matches what you are looking for:

...Personality and social psychology bulletin http psp sagepub com do the means always justify ends or sometimes a value protection model of justice reasoning linda j skitka pers soc psychol bull doi online version this article can be found at cgi content abstract published by www sagepublications on behalf society for inc additional services information email alerts subscriptions reprints journalsreprints nav permissions journalspermissions citations cites articles hosted sage journals highwire press platforms refs downloaded from univ illinois chicago library april all rights reserved not commercial use unauthorized distribution university study explored whether personal identity concerns relate in good about themselves are motivated to maintain important ways how people decide an event is fair favorableself appraisals becausedownwardshiftsinself unfair becausemoralmandatesareselectiveexpressionsofval lead anxiety depression anger other ues that central s sense formsofnegativeaffect hea...

no reviews yet
Please Login to review.