Testing an attribution-of-blame model of judgments of injustice
Abstract
The attribution‐of‐blame model of judgments of injustice, which is the focus of this article, depicts judgments of injustice as blaming of an actor who is seen as responsible for the violation of the entitlement of somebody else without sufficient justification. Responsibility and blame are conceptualized in the model in accordance with Heider (1958) and Shaver (1985). The article briefly describes the background and the propositions of the model and its scope. Then it reports a series of four correlational and one experimental studies which tested the validity of the model. The findings lend support to the propositions that attributions of causality and intention and perceived lack of sufficient justification contribute to the perception of injustice beyond the mere perception that somebody's entitlement or deserving has been violated. However, no support was found for the assumption that perceived control of the respective agent contributes to the perception of injustice. The concluding section discusses the main findings of the studies and points to questions which should be pursued in future research in order to establish the range of validity of the proposed model of judgments of injustice. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Justice judgments are affected by justifications.
“Mikula (2003) found that justice judgments were affected by justifications.”
From Blame or Justification: A Conceptual Model of How Attributions Shape Observers’ Deviant Responses to Abusive Supervision (2026) · cites this paper as Mikula, 2003
Cites
Allocating scarce resources: A contingency model of distributive justice
Skitka, L. J., & Tetlock, P. E. (1992) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/0022-1031(92)90043-j · Cited by 265 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ağaoğlu, M., & Erdil, O. (2026) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs16071191
- Authors
- Mikula, G.
- Affiliations
- University of Graz (AT)
- Corresponding author
- Mikula, Gerold
- Venue
- European Journal of Social Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-11
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 793-811
- ISSN
- 0046-2772 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-0992
- OpenAlex
- W2130490228
- Cited by
- 118
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 6.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- European Journal of Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Emotions and Moral Behavior
- Keywords
- blame attribution, attribution of responsibility, causal attribution, intention attribution, deservingness, perceived control
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review