Compensatory Rationalizations and the Resolution of Everyday Undeserved Outcomes

Abstract

People prefer to perceive the world as just; however, the everyday experience of undeserved events challenges this perception.The authors suggest that one way people rationalize these daily experiences of unfairness is by means of a compensatory bias. People make undeserved events more palatable by endorsing the notion that outcomes naturally balance out in the end--good, yet undeserved, outcomes will balance out bad outcomes, and bad undeserved outcomes will balance out good outcomes.The authors propose that compensatory biases manifest in people's interpretive processes (Study 1) and memory (Study 2). Furthermore, they provide evidence that people have a natural tendency to anticipate compensatory outcomes in the future, which, ironically, might lead them to perceive a current situation as relatively more fair (Study 3).These studies highlight an understudied means of justifying unfairness and elucidate the justice motive's power to affect people's construal of their social world.

Observers' benefit finding for victims: Consequences for perceived moral obligations

“…Experiment 1 demonstrated that if a victim is perceived as having gained benefits from their victimization, such as becoming stronger and a better person in general, then they are expected to not do harm and are obligated to assist others in need. Not only do victims make meaning of their own victimization by benefit finding (see Affleck & Tennen, 1996;Davis et al, 1998;Gaucher et al, 2010;Taylor et al, 1983), but observers also make meaning of others' victimization by finding benefits for the victim. Our studies confirm what victims have reported sensing from those around them does occur-that observers think victims should gain something positive from their negative experience .…”

“…With sense-making, an explanation for the victimization is found such as attributing it to the victim's actions or God's will. Many studies have looked at how victims themselves use benefit finding to provide meaning to their victimization or negative outcomes (Davis, Nolen-Hoeksema, & Larson, 1998;Gaucher,the cause of victimization to something the victim did (Hafer & Bégue, 2005). In contrast, the present research focuses on observers' judgments of victims when they make meaning of victimization by perceiving benefits following from the victimization.…”

“…Specifically, Lerner (1980) proposes that when ''the victim's fate is seen as rather desirable, where the suffering had later greater benefit, was good for the soul, made the victim a better person' ' (p. 20), the victim may be seen as having been compensated for the negative experience. Believing that a negative event will be compensated by positive outcomes serves to restore perceived fairness of the world (Gaucher et al, 2010). Positively stereotyping victims is a critical way in which observers manage exposure to injustice.…”

“…Participants use victim enhancement regarding causally irrelevant traits and victim derogation regarding causally relevant traits (Kay et al, 2005). People also believe they will be compensated for negative events by having positive outcomes in the future when they cannot blame their own behavior for the negative event (Gaucher et al, 2010). Perhaps then, observers will be more likely to perceive victims as benefiting by developing characteristics that could not be seen as a potential source of their victimization.…”

Seeking structure in social organization: Compensatory control and the psychological advantages of hierarchy.

“…Events ranging from undeserved fortune (Gaucher, Hafer, Kay, & Davidenko, 2010) to natural disasters (Eccleston, Kaiser, & Kraynak, 2010;Napier, Mandisodza, Andersen, & Jost, 2006) can shake an individual's confidence in their personal control over outcomes. How then do people maintain beliefs in a structured world when their sense of personal control is threatened?…”