Belief in a just world or belief in just others? a study on the object of belief in a just world.

IF 2.7 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Xiaoyu Zhang, Yanan Zhang
{"title":"Belief in a just world or belief in just others? a study on the object of belief in a just world.","authors":"Xiaoyu Zhang, Yanan Zhang","doi":"10.1186/s40359-025-02897-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>While belief in a just world has been extensively studied, the object of this belief still requires further specification. This study distinguishes two sources of uncertainty in future returns-nature and other people-and investigates whether belief in a just world is specifically directed toward human-sourced uncertainty but not nature-sourced uncertainty.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To test this hypothesis, an experiment was conducted in which participants decided whether to make an investment based on their beliefs about the return they would receive from another player. The identity of the other player was varied (computer or human, representing nature-sourced uncertainty and human-sourced uncertainty, respectively), and participants' level of belief in a just world was manipulated using a priming method. Multiple statistical analyses were conducted to examine the differences in investment behavior and expected returns between computer and human conditions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>When interacting with human players, participants in the just-world priming condition showed significantly higher investment rates and expected returns compared to those in the unjust-world priming condition. In contrast, when interacting with computer players, the differences between just-world and unjust-world conditions were non-significant, both for investment rates and expected returns. Mediation analysis further revealed that expected return mediated the relationship between priming condition and investment behavior in the human player condition.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings demonstrate that belief in a just world influences decision-making when interacting with human players but not with computer players, supporting our hypothesis that belief in a just world mainly targets human-sourced uncertainty but not nature-sourced uncertainty. This research advances our theoretical understanding of belief in a just world and contributes to our understanding of its functions for both individuals and society.</p>","PeriodicalId":37867,"journal":{"name":"BMC Psychology","volume":"13 1","pages":"564"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12107939/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-025-02897-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: While belief in a just world has been extensively studied, the object of this belief still requires further specification. This study distinguishes two sources of uncertainty in future returns-nature and other people-and investigates whether belief in a just world is specifically directed toward human-sourced uncertainty but not nature-sourced uncertainty.

Methods: To test this hypothesis, an experiment was conducted in which participants decided whether to make an investment based on their beliefs about the return they would receive from another player. The identity of the other player was varied (computer or human, representing nature-sourced uncertainty and human-sourced uncertainty, respectively), and participants' level of belief in a just world was manipulated using a priming method. Multiple statistical analyses were conducted to examine the differences in investment behavior and expected returns between computer and human conditions.

Results: When interacting with human players, participants in the just-world priming condition showed significantly higher investment rates and expected returns compared to those in the unjust-world priming condition. In contrast, when interacting with computer players, the differences between just-world and unjust-world conditions were non-significant, both for investment rates and expected returns. Mediation analysis further revealed that expected return mediated the relationship between priming condition and investment behavior in the human player condition.

Conclusion: These findings demonstrate that belief in a just world influences decision-making when interacting with human players but not with computer players, supporting our hypothesis that belief in a just world mainly targets human-sourced uncertainty but not nature-sourced uncertainty. This research advances our theoretical understanding of belief in a just world and contributes to our understanding of its functions for both individuals and society.

信仰公正的世界还是信仰公正的他人?公正世界的信仰对象研究。
背景:虽然对公正世界的信仰已经被广泛研究,但这种信仰的对象还需要进一步的说明。这项研究区分了未来回报的两种不确定性来源——自然和其他人——并调查了对公正世界的信仰是否专门针对人类的不确定性,而不是自然的不确定性。方法:为了验证这一假设,进行了一个实验,参与者根据他们对从另一个玩家那里获得回报的信念来决定是否进行投资。其他参与者的身份是多种多样的(计算机或人类,分别代表自然来源的不确定性和人类来源的不确定性),参与者对公正世界的信念水平是通过启动方法操纵的。进行了多项统计分析,以检验计算机和人类条件下投资行为和预期回报的差异。结果:在与人类玩家互动时,公正世界启动条件下的参与者表现出显著高于非公正世界启动条件下的参与者的投资率和预期回报。相比之下,当与电脑玩家互动时,无论是在投资率还是预期回报方面,公平世界和非公平世界条件之间的差异都不显著。中介分析进一步发现,预期收益在启动条件和投资行为之间起中介作用。结论:这些发现表明,在与人类玩家互动时,公正世界的信念会影响决策,而与电脑玩家互动时则不会,这支持了我们的假设,即公正世界的信念主要针对人类的不确定性,而不是自然的不确定性。这项研究推进了我们对公正世界信念的理论理解,并有助于我们理解它对个人和社会的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Psychology
BMC Psychology Psychology-Psychology (all)
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
2.80%
发文量
265
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Psychology is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers manuscripts on all aspects of psychology, human behavior and the mind, including developmental, clinical, cognitive, experimental, health and social psychology, as well as personality and individual differences. The journal welcomes quantitative and qualitative research methods, including animal studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信