2022
DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.2820
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Meaningful outrage: Anger at injustice bolsters meaning for justice sensitive individuals

Abstract: Individuals are frequently exposed to media describing salient moral violations, often eliciting negative reactions. Three studies examined whether the outrage engendered by such news may serve as a source of personal meaning for justice sensitive individuals. Using an experience sampling method, Study 1 found that among high (but not low) justice sensitive individuals, outrage (but not sadness) at unethical/unjust news content predicted greater personal meaning. Employing an experimental paradigm, Study 2 fou… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 105 publications
(138 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As displayed in Table 2, results showed that ambition pos- 1 A pilot study (N = 225) found a positive and significant relationship between unjust frustration sensitivity and loss of personal significance (r = .32, p < 0.001). Moreover, literature shows that unjust frustration sensitivity is linked to aggressive behaviour (e.g., Bondü, 2018) and that anger at injustice bolsters meaning for justice-sensitive individuals (Rothschild & Keefer, 2022).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As displayed in Table 2, results showed that ambition pos- 1 A pilot study (N = 225) found a positive and significant relationship between unjust frustration sensitivity and loss of personal significance (r = .32, p < 0.001). Moreover, literature shows that unjust frustration sensitivity is linked to aggressive behaviour (e.g., Bondü, 2018) and that anger at injustice bolsters meaning for justice-sensitive individuals (Rothschild & Keefer, 2022).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%