Distributive and Procedural Justice for Self and Others

Abstract

Tendencies to believe in justice are multidimensional, and some justice beliefs enhance personal well-being. These features suggest a considerable but largely overlooked potential for similarities and differences in the structure, endorsement, and wellness-promoting functions of justice beliefs across cultures. In the current research, we evaluate a recently available four-factor conceptualization of justice beliefs in samples of university students from the United States, Canada, India, and China (total N = 922). Multigroup confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated that the proposed four-factor model was structurally invariant, suggesting that individuals from all four cultures could be characterized according to their beliefs about distributive and procedural justice for both self and others. Cross-cultural comparisons revealed no mean differences in beliefs about distributive justice for self, whereas beliefs about procedural justice for self were higher in Canada and China than in the United States or India. In parallel, beliefs about distributive and procedural justice for others were higher in Eastern than in Western cultures. In all four cultures, a belief in distributive justice for self was associated with greater life satisfaction, whereas a belief in procedural justice for self was additionally associated in Canada and China only. No associations between beliefs about justice for others and life satisfaction were observed in any culture. The current research provides initial support for the cross-cultural viability of a four-factor approach to measuring dispositional tendencies to believe in justice. We discuss implications and opportunities for the continued study of justice in cross-cultural research.