Numerous media news items suggest on a daily basis that people tend to use harsher criteria when they judge immigrants than members of their own in-group. In the present research project, we were interested in studying individual justice judgments of a violation of a law by an Italian (in-group) or an immigrant (out-group) member and the influence of moral exclusion processes on the assessment. In particular, we examined whether those people who tend to exclude out-groups from their scope of justice will give such biased judgments and will adopt double standards, while inclusive people will not. A total of 255 people evaluated the seriousness of a crime in two different law-breaking scenarios in which the offender’s and the victim’s nationalities were systematically changed (either Italian or Romanian). Moreover, participants completed a scale measuring the moral inclusion/exclusion of other social groups. As hypothesized, participants who tended to exclude some groups from their moral community judged the Romanian more harshly than the Italian culprit. On the contrary, those people that tended to have a more inclusive moral community did not show any difference in evaluation. In conclusion, the present research highlights the importance of considering the effect of moral inclusion/exclusion processes on the evaluation of justice events, especially in an intergroup context.
Abrams, D., Randsley de Moura, G., & Travaglino, G. A. (2013). A double standard when group members behave badly: Transgression credit to ingroup leaders. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(5), 799-815. doi: 10.1037/a0033600
Bies, R., & Moag, R. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. In R. J. Lewicki, B. H. Sheppard & M. H. Bazerman (Eds.), Research on negotiations in organizations (pp. 43-55). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Bogardus, E. S. (1933). A social distance scale. Sociology & Social Research, 17, 265-271.
Deutsch, M. (1985). Distributive justice. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Fontanella, L., Villano, P., & Di Donato, M. (2016). Attitudes towards Roma people and migrants: a comparison through a Bayesian multidimensional IRT model. Quality & Quantity, 50(2), 471-490.
Hafer, C. L., Conway, P., Cheung, I., Malyk, D., & Olson, J. M. (2012). The relation between people's connection with a target and the perceived importance of justice. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 34(5), 395-409. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2012.711693
Hafer, C. L., & Olson, J. M. (2003). An analysis of empirical research on the scope of justice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7(4), 311-323.
Jost, J. T., & Major, B. (Eds.). (2001). The psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, and intergroup relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lima‐Nunes, A., Pereira, C. R., & Correia, I. (2013). Restricting the scope of justice to justify discrimination: The role played by justice perceptions in discrimination against immigrants. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43(7), 627-636.
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Marques, J. M., Yzerbyt, V. Y., & Leyens, J. P. (1988). The “black sheep effect”: Extremity of judgments towards in-group members as a function of group identification. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18(1), 1-16.
Norcini Pala, A., Villano, P., & Clinton, L. (2017). Attitudes of heterosexual men and women toward HIV negative and positive gay men. Journal of homosexuality, 64(13), 1778-1792.
Opotow, S. (1990). Moral exclusion and injustice: An introduction. Journal of Social Issues, 46(1), 1–20.
Opotow, S. (2008). "Not so much as place to lay our head...": Moral inclusion and exclusion in the American civil war reconstruction. Social Justice Research, 21(1), 26-49.
Passini, S. (2011). Individual responsibilities and moral inclusion in an age of rights. Culture & Psychology, 17(3), 281–296.
Passini, S. (2013). What do I think of others in relation to myself?
Moral identity and moral inclusion in explaining prejudice. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 23(3), 261–269.
Passini, S. (2015). Social relations, the financial crisis and human development. In C. Psaltis, A. Gillespie, & A.-N. Perret-Clermont (Eds.), Social Relations in Human and Societal Development (pp. 194–214). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Passini, S. (2016). Concern for close or distant others: The distinction between moral identity and moral inclusion. Journal of Moral Education, 45(1), 74–86.
Passini, S. (2017). Subtle prejudice and conformism: The intergroup indifference. International Journal of Psychological Research, 10(1), 25-34.
Passini, S., & Morselli, D. (2016). Blatant domination and subtle
exclusion: The mediation of moral inclusion on the relationship between social dominance orientation and prejudice. Personality and Individual Differences, 89, 182–186.
Passini, S., & Morselli, D. (2017). Construction and validation of the moral inclusion/exclusion of other groups (MIEG) scale. Social Indicators Research, 134(3), 1195-1213.
Passini, S., & Villano, P. (2013). Judging moral issues in a multicultural society: Moral reasoning and social dominance orientation. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 72(4), 235–239.
Skitka, L. J., Bauman, C. W., & Mullen, E. (2008). Morality and justice: An expanded theoretical perspective and empirical review. In K. A. Hegtvedt & J. Clay-Warner (Eds.), Justice (Vol. 25, pp. 1-27). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Sullivan, D., & Tifft, L. (2001). Restorative justice: Healing the foundations of our everyday lives. Monsey, NY: Willow Tree Press.
Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (2001). Improving intergroup relations. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.
Tyler, T. R., Boeckmann, R. J., Smith, H. J., & Huo, Y. J. (1997). Social justice in a diverse society. Boulder: Westview Press.
Van den Bos, K. (2003). On the subjective quality of social justice: the role of affect as information in the psychology of justice judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 482-498.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2000). New(s) racism: A discourse analytical approach. In S. Cottle (Ed.), Ethnic minorities and the media (pp. 33–49). Buckingham: Open University Press.
To give up copyright, the authors allow that, International Journal of Psychological Research, distribute the work more broadly, check for the reuse by others and take care of the necessary procedures for the registration and administration of copyright; at the same time, our editorial board represents the interests of the author and allows authors to re-use his work in various forms. In response to the above, authors transfer copyright to the journal, International Journal of Psychological Research. This transfer does not imply other rights which are not those of authorship (for example those that concern about patents). Likewise, preserves the authors rights to use the work integral or partially in lectures, books and courses, as well as make copies for educational purposes. Finally, the authors may use freely the tables and figures in its future work, wherever make explicit reference to the previous publication in International Journal of Psychological Research. The assignment of copyright includes both virtual rights and forms of the article to allow the editorial to disseminate the work in the manner which it deems appropriate.
The editorial board reserves the right of amendments deemed necessary in the application of the rules of publication.