Lay Causal Perceptions of Third World Poverty and the Just World Theory'

Abstract

This study investigated the factor analytic properties of Rubin and Peplau's (1975) Just World Scale and a questionnaire of possible causes of Third World poverty. Three Just World factors emerged in contrast to Hyland and Dann's (1987) four factor solution. They were interpreted as ‘Pro Just World’, Anti Just World' and 'Cynical or Reserved Just World Belief. Four poverty factors emerged, interpreted as ‘Blame the Poor; ‘Blame Third World Governments’,‘Blame Nature’ and ‘Blame Exploitation’. The most important finding to emerge was that only the ‘Pro Just World’ factor and significantly correlated with blaming the poor. Blaming the poor was significantly correlated with blaming Third World governments.

A latent profile analysis of attributions for poverty: Identifying response patterns underlying people’s willingness to help the poor

“…Because institutionally-based (or even random) causes of poverty would directly contradict such a perspective, people's level of system justification should be positively associated with a pattern of causal beliefs that places blame on the poor. Indeed, research shows that people's belief in a just world-a concept related to people's levels of system justification (see Jost & Hunyady, 2002)-is positively associated with blaming the poor for their plight (Cozzarelli et al, 2001;Furnham & Gunter, 1984;Harper, Wagstaff, Newton, & Harrison, 1990). Thus, levels of system justification should positively correlate with membership in latent profiles characterized by the belief that poverty is caused by internal and controllable factors.…”

Public Perceptions of International Development and Support for Aid in the UK: Results of a Qualitative Enquiry

“…Public attitudes to international development have been shown to be related to knowledge of development, alongside a wide range of socio-political, sociodemographic and wider attitudinal factors (see for example Stern 1998; Harper et al 1990;Harper 1996;Hine and Montiel 1999;Bolitho et al 2007). Numerous opinion surveys suggest that public understanding of international development among the general public tends to be limited (McDonnell et al 2003;TNS UK 2008;Riddell 2007).…”

“…In the literature, a number of attempts have been made to derive a classification of causes of poverty in developing countries, with the aim of understanding how and why attitudes vary among individuals (see for example Harper et al 1990;Hine and Montiel 1999;Bolitho et al 2007;Panadero and Vazquez 2008). Broadly, these studies identify four explanatory factors: 12…”

“…have strengthened these surveys in a modest way, but their analytical content remains very weak. A parallel literature, predominantly within social psychology, explores understandings of the causes of poverty in developing countries and links to wider social attitudes, for example concepts of global justice, but does not link up explicitly to the aid agenda (see for example Harper et al 1990;Hine and Montiel 1999;Bolitho et al 2007;Panadero and Vazquez 2008).…”

Reimagining Development in the UK? Findings from the UK Public Opinion Monitor

“…Also relevant is a body of literature, primarily within international relations and political science, which looks at attitude formation towards foreign policy and global justice (Beitz 1999;Holsti 1992;Goodin 1988;Jones 1999). A further literature, mainly from social psychology, explores understandings of the causes of poverty in developing countries and links to wider social attitudes, for example concepts of global justice (Harper et al 1990;Hine and Montiel 1999;Bolitho et al 2007;Panadero and Vazquez 2008). Combined, this literature presents a rather disparate body of knowledge that fails to throw significant light on key drivers of public attitudes to development assistance within donor countries (notable exceptions include Campbell et al 2001;van Heerde and Hudson 2008;Noël and Thérien 2002).…”