Citation

Okimoto TG, Wenzel M. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 2009; 39(3): 346-367.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2009, European Association of Experimental Social Psychology, Publisher John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1002/ejsp.537

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Justice theory has suggested that transgressions pose a threat to the shared values that underlie broken rules or laws, suggesting that in order to address concerns over the values violated by an offence, perceived consensus regarding those values must be reaffirmed. However, little empirical research has been conducted examining how legal responses can address those value concerns. In the current research we argue that punishments, as a common response to injustice, can reaffirm perceived value consensus through two routes: (1) by symbolically labelling the offence as against group values, thus reinforcing values towards observers and (2) by attempting to reform the offender, thus reinforcing values towards the offender. Consistent with this argument, three empirical studies showed that the public and inclusive nature of punishment helps restore a perceived value consensus as such characteristics facilitate these two processes. Moreover, these characteristics had a positive effect on perceived punishment appropriateness particularly when value concerns were heightened. These findings implicate symbolic labelling and offender reform as two processes by which punishments can restore the perception of value consensus and suggest that these processes are integral to justice restoration through punishment when value consensus is a dominant concern. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.