When Citizens Fight Back: Justice Sensitivity and Resistance to Political Reform

Abstract

A considerable number of individuals show resistance to reform, whereas others, although similarly affected, do not react in a resistant way at all. Based on research showing that people differ concerning how sensitive they are toward being a victim of injustice (victim justice sensitivity), we argued that people high in victim justice sensitivity perceive a reform more as an illegitimate limitation to their freedom resulting in more reactance. Consequently, people high in victim justice sensitivity should show more resistance to reform. We conducted three studies to test these assumptions. Our studies revealed that physicians (healthcare reform, Study 1) and students (introduction of tuition fees, Studies 2 and 3) with higher victim justice sensitivity experienced more reactance and thus showed more resistance to reform. The implications of these results for the implementation of political reforms are discussed.Keywords Justice sensitivity Á Resistance to reform Á Reactance Á Victim Á Beneficiary Around the world politicians are regularly confronted with displeased individuals or groups who do not agree with reforms recommended by experts. Resistance to real or planned political reforms during the last decade has been documented in several

Investigating the effects of age and gender on cowitness suggestibility during blame attribution

“…The findings found that male participants gained a greater level of overconfidence in their false blame attributions than female participants, after encountering cowitness misinformation. The findings suggest that male witnesses may be more susceptible to confirmation bias than female witnesses, an assertion that has been supported by previous research which argued that that male participants had a greater tendency to seek out information that supported their own judgements (Traut-Mattausch, Guter, Zanna, Jonas, & Frey, 2011). The implications of the present findings can suggest that erroneous statements from male witnesses could be more damaging to an investigation.…”

Salzburger State Reactance Scale (SSR Scale)

“…Research had already shown ( Dowd & Wallbrown, 1993 ) that people experiencing reactance are characterized as defensive, aggressive, or dominant and show nonaffiliative behavior after restrictions, and that reactant individuals are more inclined to express strong feelings and emotions ( Dowd, Wallbrown, Sanders, & Yesenosky, 1994 ). Furthermore, the items developed by Jonas et al (2009) as well as new appended items created to assess participants’ behavioral intentions have been used in several studies examining reactance in the context of change situations (e.g., political reforms), vicarious threats, and culture ( Niesta Kayser, Graupmann, Fryer, & Frey, 2015 ; Sittenthaler & Jonas, 2012 ; Sittenthaler, Jonas, & Traut-Mattausch, 2015 ; Sittenthaler, Steindl, & Jonas, 2015 ; Sittenthaler, Traut-Mattausch, & Jonas, 2015 ; Steindl & Jonas, 2012 ; Traut-Mattausch, Guter, Zanna, Jonas, & Frey, 2011 ; Traut-Mattausch, Jonas, Förg, Frey, & Heinemann, 2008 ; Traut-Mattausch, Jonas, Schwennen, & Peus, 2011 ).…”

The Dynamic Reactance Interaction – How Vested Interests Affect People’s Experience, Behavior, and Cognition in Social Interactions

“…This subjective experience was specified as the experience of uncomfortable, hostile, and aggressive feelings ( Brehm, 1966 ; Brehm and Brehm, 1981 ), but also as anger affect ( Dillard and Shen, 2005 ). Other research combined the extent to which one perceived a situation as a freedom threat with one’s emotional experience (e.g., frustrated, annoyed, offended) to assess the subjective experience of reactance ( Traut-Mattausch et al, 2008 , 2011 ; Jonas et al, 2009 ; Sittenthaler et al, 2015 ; Niesta-Kayser et al, submitted). Dillard and Shen (2005) demonstrated that reactance not only consists of affect but also of cognitions.…”