Basic social justice orientations—measuring order-related justice in the European Social Survey Round 9
Open Access
- 24 September 2022
- journal article
- validation of-measurement-instruments
- Published by Leibniz Institute for Psychology (ZPID) in Measurement Instruments for the Social Sciences
- Vol. 4 (1), 1-13
- https://doi.org/10.1186/s42409-022-00040-3
Abstract
Individuals hold normative ideas about the just distribution of goods and burdens within a social aggregate. These normative ideas guide the evaluation of existing inequalities and refer to four basic principles: (1) Equality stands for an equal distribution of rewards and burdens. While the principle of (2) need takes individual contributions into account, (3) equity suggests a distribution based on merit. The (4) entitlement principle suggests that ascribed (e.g., gender) and achieved status characteristics (e.g., occupational prestige) should determine the distribution of goods and burdens. Past research has argued that preferences for these principles vary with social position as well as the social structure of a society. The Basic Social Justice Orientations (BSJO) scale was developed to assess agreement with the four justice principles but so far has only been fielded in Germany. Round 9 of the European Social Survey (ESS R9 with data collected in 2018/2019) is the first time; four items of the BSJO scale (1 item per justice principle) were included in a cross-national survey program, offering the unique opportunity to study both within and between country variation. To facilitate substantive research on preference for equality, equity, need, and entitlement, this report provides evidence on measurement quality in 29 European countries from ESS R9. Analyzing response distributions, non-response, reliability, and associations with related variables, we find supportive evidence that the four items of the BSJO scale included in ESS R9 produce low non-response rates, estimate agreement with the four distributive principles reliably, and follow expected correlations with related concepts. Researchers should, however, remember that the BSJO scale, as implemented in the ESS R9, only provides manifest indicators, which therefore may not cover the full spectrum of the underlying distributive principles but focus on specific elements of it.Funding Information
- Leibniz-Gemeinschaft (K248/2019)
- Universität Bielefeld
This publication has 30 references indexed in Scilit:
- Distributive justice: an ordering of priorities. A comparative analysis of European opinionsInternational Review of Sociology, 2009
- Risks and RedistributionComparative Political Studies, 2009
- Health inequalities according to educational level in different welfare regimes: a comparison of 23 European countriesSociology of Health & Illness, 2008
- Inequality: Causes and ConsequencesAnnual Review of Sociology, 2007
- What Makes People Support Public Responsibility for Welfare Provision: Self-interest or Political Ideology?Acta Sociologica, 2006
- Which Is the Fairest One of All? A Positive Analysis of Justice TheoriesJournal of Economic Literature, 2003
- Welfare States, Solidarity and Justice Principles: Does the Type Really Matter?Acta Sociologica, 2001
- A COMPARISON OF MASS ATTITUDES TOWARDS THE WELFARE STATE IN DIFFERENT INSTITUTIONAL REGIMES, 1985-1990International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 1998
- Equity, Equality, and Need: What Determines Which Value Will Be Used as the Basis of Distributive Justice?Journal of Social Issues, 1975
- Towards an understanding of inequity.The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1963