Distributive Justice for Others, Collective Angst, and Support for Exclusion of Immigrants

Abstract

Harsh treatment of others can reflect an underlying motivation to view the world as fair and just and also a dispositional tendency to believe in justice. However, there is a critical need to refine and expand existing knowledge, not only to identify underlying psychological processes but also to better understand how justice may be implicated in support for exclusionary policies. Across two studies, we show that support for policies that restrict immigrants is exclusively associated with thoughts about fair outcomes for other people (distributive justice for others). In Study 1, Americans' dispositional tendency to believe in distributive justice for others was associated with greater support for a policy proposing to further restrict immigrant job seekers' capacity to gain employment in the United States. In Study 2, we experimentally primed thoughts about justice in a sample of U.S. police officers. Support for a policy that mandated stricter policing of illegal immigration was strongest among officers who first thought about fair outcomes for other people, relative to other unique justice primes. Across both studies, distributive justice for others was associated with greater collective angst-perceived threat towards the future existence of Americans. Moreover, collective angst mediated the link between distributive justice for others and support for restrictive policies. Overall, this research suggests that thoughts about distributive justice for others can especially diminish compassion towards immigrants and other underprivileged groups via support for exclusionary policies. In addition, merely thinking about distributive justice for others may be sufficient to amplify social callousness.

Will we be harmed, will it be severe, can we protect ourselves? Threat appraisals predict collective angst (and its consequences)

“…Although there are individual differences in the extent to which group members feel collective angst (Jetten & Wohl, 2012;Wohl, Porat, & Halperin, 2016), appraising a perceived threat to the group's future vitality will elicit this group-based emotion (Lucas et al, 2014;Mashuri & Zaduqisti, 2015;Mols & Jetten, 2014;Wohl, King, & Taylor, 2014;Wohl et al, 2010). This emotional reaction is distinct from other related group-based emotional reactions, such as collective fear (Wohl & Branscombe, 2009;Wohl et al, 2010).…”

“…Importantly, group-level emotions function to regulate group-relevant or collective behavior (Maitner, Mackie, & Smith, 2006;van Zomeren, Leach, & Spears, 2012), rather than individual behavior (Carver, 2015). In the case of collective angst, behavior is directed towards attempts to secure the future vitality of the in-group.Although there are individual differences in the extent to which group members feel collective angst (Jetten & Wohl, 2012;Wohl, Porat, & Halperin, 2016), appraising a perceived threat to the group's future vitality will elicit this group-based emotion (Lucas et al, 2014;Mashuri & Zaduqisti, 2015;Mols & Jetten, 2014;Wohl, King, & Taylor, 2014;Wohl et al, 2010). This emotional reaction is distinct from other related group-based emotional reactions, such as collective fear (Wohl & Branscombe, 2009;Wohl et al, 2010).…”

“…For example, Mols and Jetten (2014) showed that leaders of populist right-wing parties in Europe attempt to instill feelings of collective angst in their audience as a means to increase support for harsher treatment of immigrants. Likewise, collective angst among Americans increases support for policies that restrict the work opportunities of immigrants (Lucas et al, 2014). Thus, collective angst can have important social and political consequences.…”

“…We also extended our analysis to investigate the consequences of collective angst. Prior research demonstrates that collective angst is a mediating mechanism by which perceived threats to the in-group facilitate support for harsh treatment of threatening out-groups (Jetten & Wohl, 2012;Lucas et al, 2014). As such, we examined whether collective angst is a mechanism by which the appraisals of an attack by ISIS increase prejudice towards Muslims.…”

“…Likewise, Canadians experienced collective angst when they perceived Canadian distinctiveness from the United States was under threat (Wohl et al, 2011). Whether the threat perceived is realistic or symbolic, the consequence of collective angst is the same-an upswing in support for efforts to strengthen the ingroup (e.g., support for policies that are perceived to be in-group protective; for a review, see Lucas, Rudolph, Zhdanova, Barkho, & Weidner, 2014;Wohl, Squires, & Caouette, 2012). To date, however, little is known about the appraisals of intergroup events that are necessary to elicit collective angst.…”