Accounting for group differences in appraisals of social inequality: Differential injustice standards

Abstract

We tested whether differential appraisals of inequality are a function of the injustice standards used by different groups. A confirmatory standard of injustice is defined as the amount of evidence needed to arrive at the conclusion that injustice has occurred. Consistent with a motivational shifting of standards view, we found that advantaged and disadvantaged group members set different standards of injustice when judging the magnitude of gender (Study 1) and racial (Study 2) wage inequality. In addition, because advantaged and disadvantaged group members formed - based on their differential standards - divergent appraisals of wage inequality, they experienced differential desire to restore inter-group justice. We discuss the implications of promoting low confirmatory standards for changing perceptions of social reality and for motivating justice-restorative behaviour.