Asymmetry in Belief in a Just World: Item Valence Skews Self-Reported Just-World Beliefs

Abstract

The just-world theory, otherwise known as belief in a just world (BJW) states that individuals have a need to believe that the world is just, where individuals get what they deserve and deserve what they get (Lerner, 1980). The implicit symmetry assumption of the just-world theory is that individuals apply just-world beliefs equally to both positive and negative experiences, but this has rarely been tested. Thus, the present study aimed to determine whether the BJW symmetry assumption holds at a trait level. The just-world measure used to test this aim was the BJW-self scale, as it is associated with adaptive psychological outcomes. A positively valenced (Positive BJW-self), and a negatively valenced (Negative BJW-self) version of a common BJW-self scale were created. Participants (N = 352) completed an online self-report survey, which measured Positive BJW-self, Negative BJW-self, four outcome measures; life satisfaction, optimism, gratitude, psychological entitlement, and two control measures; self-esteem, and social desirability. Participants scored higher on Positive BJW-self than Negative BJW-self. Additionally, Positive BJW-self and Negative BJW-self were differentially associated with the outcome measures. The results suggest that Positive BJW-self and Negative BJW-self function as unique constructs. Implications of these results are that the symmetry assumption believed to underpin the just-world theory does not hold at a trait level, and that the present study's findings should be considered when interpreting research on BJW-self.