Observer perceptions of moral obligations in groups with a history of victimization.

The authors investigated when observers assign contemporary group members moral obligations based on their group's victimization history. In Experiment 1, Americans perceived Israelis as obligated to help Sudanese genocide victims and as guiltworthy for not helping if reminded of the Holocaust and its descendants were linked to this history. In Experiment 2, participants perceived Israelis as more obligated to help and guiltworthy for not helping when the Holocaust was presented as a unique victimization event compared with when genocide was presented as pervasive. Experiments 3 and 4 replicated the effects of Experiment 1 with Cambodians as the victimized group. Experiment 5 demonstrated that participants perceived Cambodians as having more obligations under high just world threat compared with low just world threat. Perceiving victimized groups as incurring obligations is one just world restoration method of providing meaning to collective injustice.

Accounting for group differences in appraisals of social inequality: differential injustice standards.

We tested whether differential appraisals of inequality are a function of the injustice standards used by different groups. A confirmatory standard of injustice is defined as the amount of evidence needed to arrive at the conclusion that injustice has occurred. Consistent with a motivational shifting of standards view, we found that advantaged and disadvantaged group members set different standards of injustice when judging the magnitude of gender (Study 1) and racial (Study 2) wage inequality. In addition, because advantaged and disadvantaged group members formed - based on their differential standards - divergent appraisals of wage inequality, they experienced differential desire to restore inter-group justice. We discuss the implications of promoting low confirmatory standards for changing perceptions of social reality and for motivating justice-restorative behaviour.