Attitudes toward victim and victimization in the light of the just world theory

• Main Author: Simeunović-Patić Biljana
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Victimology Society of Serbia and Prometej-Beograd 2017-01-01
• Series: Temida
• Subjects: just world theory; just world belief; victimization; victim blaming; victim derogation
• Online Access: http://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/1450-6637/2017/1450-66371702203S.pdf
• ISSN: 1450-6637; 2406-0941

The present paper discusses current empirical status of the Just world theory introduced several decades ago by Melvin Lerner, the content and functions of a just world belief as its central construct, and particularly, the relation between a just world belief and victim blaming and victim derogation phenomena. In the light of existing research evidence, a just world belief and a need to re-establish a “justice” when this belief is threatened, is considered to be an adaptive mechanism that protect a belief that a world is secure and the future is predictable, as well as a confidence in the purposefulness of selfdiscipline, long-term personal investments and social rules respecting. As proposed By the just world theory, when a person faces injustice, i.e. others’ (innocent victims’) suffering, his/her belief in a just world is threatened. Possible reactions to that threat comprise various rational victim helping activities, but also specific cognitive defensive strategies, including cognitive distortion, rationalization and reinterpretation of an event in order to minimize injustice or deny injustice happened at all. In the course of reinterpretation of injustice, victims are often blamed for their former actions, or derogated for their character, in order to indicate them responsible for their own fate and suffering. The findings of research studies suggest that the likelihood of employing cognitive defensive strategies rises if formal responses to crime and victimization lack or fail. This further suggests that an efficient and effective formal social response in terms of both sanctioning of offenders and reparation of victims should be considered highly important in reducing the risk of stigmatization and rejection of victims. Finally, the paper discusses the role of victim’s just world beliefs in post-trauma adaptation and coping processes. In virtue of findings from the existing research literature it may be concluded that victim’s belief in a just world is not necessarily obstructive for the adaptation and coping process. Moreover, in the research literature prevail findings telling in support of an assertion that strong just world belief serves significantly as a self-protective function.