Socializing justice: The interface of just world beliefs and legal socialization

Abstract

One of the pillars of legal socialization theory is how nonlegal contexts shape the legitimacy of and compliance with laws. Yet there is little longitudinal evidence establishing the interface mechanism between these spheres. The purpose of this research was to demonstrate how youths' beliefs in a just world (BJW) can help explain the transmission between the justice of non-legal authorities (parents and schools) and law legitimacy and rule violating behavior (RVB). We utilized two waves of longitudinal data from adolescents at ages 13 and 14 (N = 680) in the São Paulo Legal Socialization Study. Structural equation modeling revealed a good fit to the tested model that parental procedural justice and school justice predict both personal and general BJW, and these predict law legitimacy evaluations 1 year later. General and personal BJW also had an indirect effect on RVB over the following year via law legitimacy. The results suggest that non-legal authorities may influence law legitimacy not through a direct projection (which was not significant), but through an indirect process of worldview construction. Legal socialization and just world belief research can converge to help explain the interface between non-legal and legal spheres of authority.

A dark lens or a dark world? Conceptualising Justice Capital

“…Other studies have demonstrated the importance of family justice (Dalbert & Radant, 2004;Umemura & Šerek, 2016), parenting practices (Hofer & Spengler, 2018;Thomas et al, 2021), and school justice (Thomas et al, 2021; as predictors of BJW. A recent study successfully predicted 47% of the variance of Personal BJW and 68% of General BJW based on parental procedural justice and school fairness among Brazilian adolescents (Thomas et al, 2021). That statistical model went on to demonstrate how BJW predicts perceptions of law legitimacy and rule compliance, in line with legal socialisation research (Tyler & Trinkner, 2017).…”

“…The most cited answer was family (Hoolihan & Thomas, 2020). Other studies have demonstrated the importance of family justice (Dalbert & Radant, 2004;Umemura & Šerek, 2016), parenting practices (Hofer & Spengler, 2018;Thomas et al, 2021), and school justice (Thomas et al, 2021; as predictors of BJW. A recent study successfully predicted 47% of the variance of Personal BJW and 68% of General BJW based on parental procedural justice and school fairness among Brazilian adolescents (Thomas et al, 2021).…”

“…Although historically BJW was predominantly researched in wealthy individualistic communities, the research base is shifting in just world theory, and much more research is being published from China (Jian et al, 2021), Brazil (Thomas et al, 2021), Turkey (Kiral Ucar et al, 2019), Korea (Kim & Park, 2018), Kenya (Thomas & Mucherah, 2016), Russia (Nartova-Bochaver et al, 2018, India, and Portugal (Correia et al, 2009), among others. This is an opportunity for just world researchers to collaborate and study societal variables more explicitly.…”

Accusation Is Not Proof: Procedural Justice in Psychology

“…Procedural justice is also related to people's belief in a just world, or what is sometimes known as the "just-world hypothesis." Personal belief in a just world reflects individuals' confidence that they will be treated fairly and get what they deserve (Thomas et al, 2021). A personal belief in a just world is seen as an essential adaptive coping mechanism related to several positive behavioral and psychological outcomes, such as life satisfaction, less distress at school, increased long-term motivation, and decreased negative affect (Bartholomaeus & Strelan, 2019).…”

Violent video game exposure and bullying perpetration among Chinese adolescents: The moderating role of belief in a just world

“…General BJW is the belief that other people are treated fairly in the world, whereas personal BJW is the belief that the individual themselves are treated fairly. Individuals with high BJW, who tend to have high life satisfaction and well-being (Lipkusa et al, 1996), are less likely to violate rules, less likely to bully others, and have fewer cheating behaviors (Donat et al, 2012(Donat et al, , 2020Thomas et al, 2021).…”