Spring 2018

Newsletter Editor: Manfred Schmitt (


  • News from the President
  • 17th Biennial Conference of the International Society for Justice Research
  • Awards to ISJR Members
  • Justice-Related Dissertations
  • Justice Related Books
  • Recent Justice-Related Publications of ISJR Members
  • ISJR Membership and Listserv


News from the President


Dear ISJR members,


My ISJR presidency will end two months from now. I would therefore like to use this ‘News from the President’ section to briefly take stock and reflect on the accomplishments of our society so far, and the road ahead. 


At present ISJR is a society with a successful biannual conference, an interdisciplinary network of like-minded scholars, a professionally run journal, and a book series by an excellent academic publisher. Furthermore, our individual members make numerous impressive research contributions to the scientific study of social justice. Each newsletter I am impressed with the many new publications that our members shared, leaving us all with a lot of reading material. We also have awards for members who make outstanding contributions to our field, and of course I would like to particularly congratulate Jaime Napier (winner of the 2018 Early Career Contribution Award) and Allan Lind (winner of the 2018 Lifetime Achievement Award)!


But how to keep ISJR vibrant for the future? The scientific enterprise as a whole is dynamic, closely associated with novel societal developments, and in continuous change. A key feature of success for any scientific society is to be sensitive to such developments and not get stuck in old habits or traditions. I would like to particularly advocate innovation through multidisciplinarity. In the past several of our members have expressed concern that ISJR is too much composed of psychologists. This is unfortunate, particularly because justice research lends itself perfectly for an interdisciplinary approach. Stimulating the multidisciplinary character of our society should be high on the agenda.


Being a psychologist myself, in the past six years I increasingly collaborated with (for instance) political scientists and criminologists, and cannot overstate how much I benefited from this. These collaborations yielded novel research on justice-related topics such as radicalization, conspiracy theories, bystander apathy during criminal incidents, fake news, and even burglary behavior. A multidisciplinary perspectives increases the quality of research through a richer methodological toolbox, and provides a wealth of inspiring ideas for new research topics.


So my final call to all of our members is to regularly come out of your comfort zones, and be open to different perspectives, different methodologies, and new research questions that address important justice-related issues. It will push our field and our society forward, and also will keep your professional life as a researcher interesting and fun.


Jan-Willem van Prooijen
ISJR President



17th Biennial Conference of the International Society for Justice Research

The 17th bienial meeting of ISJR will occur July 25-28 in Atlanta, Georgia. The meeting, hosted by Emory University in conjunction with Georgia State University and University of Georgia, features the theme Interrogating Injustice and highlights issues related to race and to the distribution of health care resources, among other social justice concerns. Plenary speakers include: Dr. Bernard Lafayette, civil rights leader and expert in nonviolent protest; Dr. Kimberly Jacob Arriola (Emory University), specialist on justice and health in communities of color; and Dr. Jan Willem van Prooijen (VU University in Amsterdam and current ISJR president), noted expert on injustice, punishment, and forgiveness.  Other featured addresses include those by Lifetime Achievement Award winner Dr. E. Alan Lind (Duke University) and Early Career Contribution Award winner Jaime Napier (New York University Abu Dhabi). The conference includes 13 organized symposia and a wide array of paper sessions and poster presentations. 


Drs. Manfred Schmitt (University of Koblenz-Landau) and Clara Sabbagh (University of Haifa) are reprising their roles as leaders of the PhD Student Workshop on July 25. Conference attendees may join an evening an excursion to Ponce City Market, a recently renovated landmark building in Atlanta that provides a glimpse of the city skyline, a variety of eateries, miniature golf, and access to the beltline (a walkway linking neighborhoods encircling the city). The gala dinner at The Carter Center includes access to the presidential museum and more city views. Although conference sessions end by noon on Saturday, July 28, attendees may opt to visit two iconic locations: The King Center for Nonviolence and the National Center for Civil and Human Rights.


A few rooms at the Emory Conference Center remain at the (lower) conference price and residence hall rooms are available at a bargain price. Early-bird registration closes on June 1. Conference registrants will receive more detailed information (e.g., about locations for picking up packets, directions for walking between lodging and sessions at the School of Public Health, parking) in early July. Please see for more details. Looking forward to seeing you in Atlanta!


Karen Hegtvedt


Awards to ISJR Members

Olga Stavrova from the University of Tilburg has received a Rising Star nomination from der Association for Psychological Science. Congratulations!


Justice-Related Dissertations

Melissa de Vel-Palumbo, Flinders University
Redemption Through Suffering: How Self-Punishment Restores Moral Identity



Individuals sometimes respond to their misdeeds by punishing themselves. Though such behaviours might be thought of as dysfunctional, in this thesis I argue that self-punishment is a strategy transgressors can use to achieve moral redemption. The objective of this thesis was to understand the intrapersonal and interpersonal functions of self-punishment; that is, why people engage in self-punishment, considering both individuals’ own experiences and also the effect on others’ perceptions. This work developed and validated an identity-regulating model of self-punishment, considering cognitive, emotional, and interpersonal outcomes of engaging in self-punitive behaviour. I propose that transgressors use self-punishment in two distinct ways to resolve the threat to moral identity triggered by their wrongdoing: "moral cleansing" and "moral repair." Evidence for the model was found using both quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Having first conducted an analysis of the felt experience of naturally occurring self-punishment, findings were followed up with experimentation in the laboratory using various self-punishment paradigms. Subsequently, the work examined the way observers respond to self-punishers, demonstrating that self-punishment could be an effective way for transgressors to restore a sense of symbolic justice, and thus regain moral standing in their social group. Taken together, the findings suggest that while self-punishers can redeem their moral identity through either excusing or confronting their wrongdoing, these two functions have profoundly different implications for intrapersonal and interpersonal repair.




Karolina Urbanska, Queen's University Belfast, Northern Ireland (currently at Université Clermont Auvergne, France)
Beyond procedural justice: Responding to intergroup-level authority decisions


The present thesis builds on the relational models of procedural justice (RMPJ) put forward by Tyler and colleagues, which theorise about the importance of authorities being fair in the way they make their decisions. In this view, fair procedures symbolically inform people of their social standing in the society and through this, authorities can gain legitimacy. The present work expands on these models in two ways. First, it proposes that the analysis of authority-subordinate interactions should move beyond the individual-level research, to consider group and intergroup-level interactions. Secondly, it argues that identification with a social group in the first place can be a determinant of perceptions of fairness and the subsequent judgements of the decisions made by authorities. Eight experimental studies investigating group members’ responses to the intergroup-level authority decisions were conducted. The main findings suggest that (a) feelings of loyalty to one’s group increase preference for ingroup favouring decisions regardless of whether these decisions are fair or not, (b) culture and its underpinning values can shape perceptions of fairness in relation to authority decisions, and (c) people generally expect authorities to be fair to others regardless if they are of low or high social standing, but ideologies about the structure of the social hierarchy can inform these expectations of fairness. The findings are discussed in the light of the RMPJ and the implications for governing divided societies.


Justice-Related Books

Moghaddam, F. M. (2018). Mutual radicalization: How groups and nations drive each other to extremes. APA Press.


Radicalization has become a serious global problem. Groups and nations are increasingly embroiled in escalating conflicts with one another that are defined by pathological hatred and ideological polarization, with devastating consequences, including terrorism and war. Social psychologist Fathali M. Moghaddam calls this process mutual radicalization. In this groundbreaking book, he explores its causes and potential solutions.


Drawing from well‑established psychological principles, Moghaddam presents a dynamic, cyclical three‑stage model of mutual radicalization that explains how groups gather under extremist ideologies, establish rigid norms under authoritarian leadership, and develop antagonistic worldviews that exaggerate the threats posed by each other. This process leads to intensifying aggressive actions that can even reach the point of mutual destruction. Moghaddam applies his model to 10 real‑world case studies of mutual radicalization that focus on three main areas: the conflict between Islamist radicals and extreme nationalists in the West; nations that are mired in long-standing hostilities, including North Korea and South Korea; and the increasingly toxic atmosphere in American politics. Moghaddam offers practical solutions for achieving deradicalization and highlights historical successes, such as German reunification.,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch

Van den Bos, K. (in press). Why people radicalize: How unfairness judgments are used to fuel radical beliefs, extremist behaviors, and terrorism. New York: Oxford University Press.


In Why People Radicalize, Kees van den Bos argues that if we want to truly understand radicalization and prevent, attenuate, and fight violent extremism and terrorism, we must pay attention to what is driving the radicalization process. This implies that we should systematically analyze how radicalizing persons interpret the world. For example, perceptions that certain situations are fundamentally unfair and hence need to be changed are among the core issues that drive Muslim, right-wing, and left-wing radicalization. Furthermore, experiences and perceptions of unfairness and injustice can tempt those who struggle with self-control to break the law and engage in violent extremist and terrorist behavior.


Why People Radicalize is among the first attempts to provide a systematic, integrative, and in-depth analysis of the psychology of unfairness judgments and the ways these judgments impact on various radicalization processes. Discussing several conceptual and practical implications that follow from this line of reasoning, the book emphasizes the role of careful scientific thought and the notion of taking individuals seriously, as judgments of unfairness are not merely perceptions. They feel genuine to the persons forming the judgments.


This volume discusses in detail how these radicalization processes can develop and what components are of pivotal relevance in these processes. Accessible for scientists, professionals, and practitioners, the book explains how uncertainty and insufficient self-corrections influence this process. Finally, the book delineates future research issues on radicalization, extremism, and terrorism and applies the analysis to appropriate legal contexts, making the book relevant for policy and decision makers, among others.


Recent Justice-Related Publications of ISJR Members

Azevedo, F., Jost, J.T., & Rothmund, T. (2017). “Making America great again”: System justification in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 3, 231-240.


Badaan, V., Jost, J.T., Osborne, D., Sibley, C.G., Ungaretti, J., Etchezahar, E., & Hennes, E. (2018). Social protest and its discontents: A system justification perspective. Contention: The Multidisciplinary Journal of Social Protest, 6, 1–22. 


Badaan, V., Stone, S., Langer, M., & Jost, J.T. (2016). Virtual special issue of Political Psychology on “The Good Society: Prospects for Reason, Communication, and Well-Being.” Archived here:


Ballard, A., & Easteal, P., (2018) What’s in a Word? The Language of Workplace Bullying, Alternative Law Journal (43)1, 17-23.


Brady, W.J., Wills, J., Jost, J.T., Tucker, J., & Van Bavel, J.J. (2017). Emotion shapes the diffusion of moralized content in social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114, 7313–7318.


Brekke, Kjell Arne, Konow, James, and Nyborg, Karine (2017). “Framing in a Threshold Public Goods Experiment with Heterogeneous Endowments,” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, vol. 138 (June), pp. 99-110.


Cichocka, A., Górska, P., Jost, J.T., & Sutton, R. (2018). What inverted U can do for your country: A curvilinear relationship between confidence in the social system and political engagement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, in press.


Cramwinckel, F. M., Scheepers, D. T., & Van der Toorn, J. (2018). Interventions to reduce blatant and subtle sexual orientation- and gender identity prejudice (SOGIP): Current knowledge and future directions. Social Issues and Policy Review, 12, 183-217.


Easteal, P., Young, L., & Carline, A. (2018)  Domestic Violence, Property and Family Law, International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 32(2),  eby005, (Advanced article - no page numbers)


Fitch, E., & Easteal, P. (2017) Vexatious Litigation in Family Law and Coercive Control: Ways to Improve Legal Remedies and Better Protect the Victims, Family Law Review 7(2), 103-115.


Ghafournia, N., & Easteal, P., (2017) Spouse Sponsorship Policies:  Focus on Serial Sponsors, Laws 6(4) 24; doi:10.3390/laws6040024. 


Grootelaar, H. A. M., & Van den Bos, K. (2018). How litigants in Dutch courtrooms come to trust judges: The role of perceived procedural justice, outcome favorability, and other socio-legal moderators. Law and Society Review, 52, 234-268.


Grootelaar, H. A. M., & Van den Bos, K. (in press). Conducting experiments and surveys in the field of administrative justice: On the importance of fair procedures in governance. In W. H. van Boom, P. Desmet, & P. Mascini (Eds.), Empirical legal research in action: Reflections on methods and their applications. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.


Hopkins, A., Carline, A., & Easteal, P. (2018) Equal Consideration and Informed Imagining: Recognising and Responding to the Lived Experiences of Abused Women Who Kill, Melbourne University Law Review 41(3),,-Carline-and-Easteal-413-Advance.pdf. (advance copy publication – no page numbers yet)


Jasso, G. (2018). The Theory of Comparison Processes.  In P. J. Burke (Ed.), Contemporary Social Psychological Theories (2nd Ed., pp 249-280).  Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.


Jones, K.L., Noorbaloochi, S., Jost, J.T., Bonneau, R., Nagler, J., & Tucker, J.A. (2018). Liberal and conservative values: What we can learn from Congressional tweets. Political Psychology, 39, 423-443. 


Jost, J.T. (2017a). Ideological asymmetries and the essence of political psychology. Political Psychology, 38, 167-208. [Presidential Address]


Jost, J.T. (2017b). The marketplace of ideology: “Elective affinities” in political psychology and their implications for consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 27, 502-520. 


Jost, J.T. (2017c). Working class conservatism: A system justification perspective. Current Opinion in Psychology, 18, 73-78. 


Jost, J.T. (2017d). A theory of system justification. Psychological Science Agenda (PSA). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. 


Jost, J.T. (2018). Underestimating belief in climate change. Nature Climate Change, 8, 189–190.


Jost, J.T., & Hunyady, O. (2018). Mass psychology in the age of Trump. Democracy: A Journal of Ideas, Spring issue (No. 48). 


Jost, J.T., Becker, J., Osborne, D., & Badaan, V. (2017). Missing in (collective) action: Ideology, system justification, and the motivational antecedents of protest behavior. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26, 99-108.  


Jost, J.T., Langer, M., Badaan, V., Azevedo, F., Etchezahar, E., Ungaretti, J., & Hennes, E. (2017). Ideology and the limits of self-interest: System justification motivation and conservative advantages in mass politics. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 3 (3), e1-e26. doi: 10.1037/tps0000127


Jost, J.T., Sapolsky, R., & Nam, H.H. (2018). Speculations on the evolutionary origins of system justification. Evolutionary Psychology, in press.


Jost, J.T., Stern, C., Rule, N.O., & Sterling, J. (2017). The politics of fear: Is there an ideological asymmetry in existential motivation? Social Cognition, 35, 324–353. 


Jost, J.T., van der Linden, S., Panagopoulos, C. & Hardin, C.D. (2018). Ideological asymmetries in conformity, desire for shared reality, and the spread of misinformation. Current Opinion in Psychology, 23, 77-83.


Konow, James (2017). “Can Studying Ethics Affect Moral Views? An Application to Economic Justice,” Journal of Economic Methodology, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 190-203.


Langer, M., Jost, J.T., Bonneau, R., Metzger, M., Noorbaloochi, S., & Penfold-Brown, D. (2018). Digital dissent: An analysis of the motivational contents of Tweets from an Occupy Wall Street demonstration.

Motivation Science, in press.


Nam, H.H., Jost, J.T., & Feldman, S. (2017). The neurobiology of fairness and social justice: An introduction. Social Justice Research, 30, 289–299.


Nam, H.H., Jost, J.T., & Feldman, S. (Eds.) (2017). Special issue of Social Justice Research on “The Neurobiology of Fairness and Social Justice” (Vol. 30, No. 4, December 2017).

Nam, H.H., Jost, J.T., Kaggen, L., Campbell-Meiklejohn, D., & Van Bavel, J.J. (2018). Amygdala structure and the tendency to regard the social system as legitimate and desirable. Nature Human Behaviour, 2, 133-138.


Pereira, A., & Van Prooijen, J.-W. (2018). Why we sometimes punish the innocent: The role of group entitativity in collective punishment. PloS ONE, 13(5): e0196852.


Piccoli, B., Callea, A., Urbini, F., Ingusci, E., Chirumbolo, A., & De Witte, H. (2017). Job insecurity and Performance: The mediating Role of Organizational Identification. Personnel Review, 46 (8), 1508-1522. []


Sainz, M., Martínez, R., Moya, M., & Rodríguez-Bailón, R. (2018). Animalizing the disadvantaged, mechanizing the wealthy: The convergence of socioeconomic status and humanity attributions. International Journal of Psychology. doi: 10.1002/ijop.12485.


Sterling, J., & Jost, J.T. (2018). Moral discourse in the Twitterverse: Effects of ideology and political sophistication on language use among U.S. citizens and members of Congress. Journal of Language and Politics, 17, 195-221.


Stouten J., Tripp T., Bies R., De Cremer D. (In press). When something is not right: The value of silence. Academy of Management Perspectives.


Van den Bos, K. (2018). On the possibility of intuitive and deliberative processes working in parallel in moral judgment. In J. Graham & K. Gray (Eds.), Atlas of moral psychology (pp. 31-39). New York: Guilford.


van der Toorn, J., Jost, J.T., & Loffredo, B. (2017). Conservative ideological shift among adolescents in response to system threat. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 225, 357-362. [Special issue, Political and Civic Engagement in Youth, guest edited by X. Chryssochoou & M. Barrett] 


van der Toorn, J., Jost, J.T., Packer, D., Noorbaloochi, S., & Van Bavel, J.J. (2017). In defense of tradition: Religiosity, conservatism, and opposition to same-sex marriage in North America. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43, 1455-1468.


Van Prooijen, J.-W., & Van Vugt, M. (in press). Conspiracy theories: Evolved functions and psychological mechanisms. Perspectives on Psychological Science.


Vargas-Salfate, S. (in press). The role of personal control in the palliative function of system justification among indigenous and non-indigenous Peruvian students. Revista de Psicología Social/International Journal of Social Psychology


Vargas-Salfate, S., Paez, D., Khan, S. S., Liu, J. H., & Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2018). System justification enhances well-being: A longitudinal analysis of system justification in 18 countries. British Journal of Social Psychology. doi: 10.1111/bjso.12254 


Vargas-Salfate, S., Paez, D., Liu, J. H., Pratto, F., & Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2018). A comparison of social dominance theory and system justification: The role of social status in 19 nations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. doi: 10.1177/0146167218757455




ISJR Membership and Listserv

You are not a member and would like to join ISJR? Please go to our website to the "Membership" tab: and click "Become a member.”


As a member you will be automatically subscribed to the ISJR listserv. Otherwise, to subscribe to the ISJR listserv, go to:


If you are already a member of ISJR, please make sure you renew your membership and keep your membership details updated (in particular your email!):


For further information, please email to: