Scholarlink

<p>All day, every day, the sense of justice is at work, touching farflung areas of the human experience. Understanding its operation is thus a central goal for social science. This paper provides an overview of justice analysis—framework, theory, empirics. The core foundational relation is the justice evaluation function (JEF)—specified as <i>J</i> = θ ln(<i>A</i>/<i>C</i>)—whereby the observer reflects on a rewardee (self or other), comparing the actual reward <i>A</i> to the just reward <i>C</i> (where “just” always means “just in the eyes of the observer”) and generating the justice evaluation <i>J</i>, the assessment that the rewardee is fairly or unfairly rewarded, and, if unfairly rewarded, whether underrewarded or overrewarded and to what degree. The paper briefly describes the JEF’s origins and properties, the latter including loss aversion and a link to the Golden Number. The JEF has proved fruitful, delivering an abundance of testable predictions across multiple topical domains—including novel predictions—and useful empirically. The paper probes a major current challenge, namely, the JEF’s vulnerability to response biases in <i>C</i> and <i>J</i>. Justice analysis itself distinguishes between <i>true</i> and <i>disclosed C</i> and between <i>experienced</i> and <i>expressed J</i> (the latter pair linked by the expressiveness coefficient theta). Justice empirics has fielded designs that estimate true <i>C</i> and experienced <i>J</i>—chiefly by using factorial survey experiments in which the actual reward <i>A</i> is fixed by the researcher and enough observations are obtained from respondents to enable respondent-specific regressions. The paper also considers links between distributive justice and retributive and procedural justice; links between the principles of microjustice and macrojustice in distributive/retributive/procedural justice and the three principles of tax justice; further links to all reference-dependent processes; the Anselmian decisionmaking model; the unification of justice, status, and power; and a quartet of deeper engines of behavior which may themselves give rise to justice, status, and power. Importantly and crucially, inequality appears everywhere and in many guises, suggesting the busy life of inequality in the justice circuit.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

From Foundations of Justice Analysis to Current and Future Challenges

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月29日

查看全文
  • Guillermina Jasso

摘要

All day, every day, the sense of justice is at work, touching farflung areas of the human experience. Understanding its operation is thus a central goal for social science. This paper provides an overview of justice analysis—framework, theory, empirics. The core foundational relation is the justice evaluation function (JEF)—specified as J = θ ln(A/C)—whereby the observer reflects on a rewardee (self or other), comparing the actual reward A to the just reward C (where “just” always means “just in the eyes of the observer”) and generating the justice evaluation J, the assessment that the rewardee is fairly or unfairly rewarded, and, if unfairly rewarded, whether underrewarded or overrewarded and to what degree. The paper briefly describes the JEF’s origins and properties, the latter including loss aversion and a link to the Golden Number. The JEF has proved fruitful, delivering an abundance of testable predictions across multiple topical domains—including novel predictions—and useful empirically. The paper probes a major current challenge, namely, the JEF’s vulnerability to response biases in C and J. Justice analysis itself distinguishes between true and disclosed C and between experienced and expressed J (the latter pair linked by the expressiveness coefficient theta). Justice empirics has fielded designs that estimate true C and experienced J—chiefly by using factorial survey experiments in which the actual reward A is fixed by the researcher and enough observations are obtained from respondents to enable respondent-specific regressions. The paper also considers links between distributive justice and retributive and procedural justice; links between the principles of microjustice and macrojustice in distributive/retributive/procedural justice and the three principles of tax justice; further links to all reference-dependent processes; the Anselmian decisionmaking model; the unification of justice, status, and power; and a quartet of deeper engines of behavior which may themselves give rise to justice, status, and power. Importantly and crucially, inequality appears everywhere and in many guises, suggesting the busy life of inequality in the justice circuit.