Ideology and the Interpretation of Personal Experience: Procedural Justice and Political Quiescence

Abstract

Objectively disadvantaged groups in American society often fail to take political actions that would rectify their disadvantaged state. Scholarly treatments of this failure to mobilize have traditionally examined the beliefs of the disadvantaged about distributive fairness, i.e., about the fair distribution of money or opportunities across members of society. This paper explores citizens' beliefs about the fairness of the procedures by which outcome distributions are made. We argue that procedural evaluations are a key input into evaluations of the political system and, through such evaluations, into political actions. In fact, people's beliefs about procedures are often more important than their beliefs about the fairness of the distribution of income or opportunity. An examination of procedural justice beliefs suggests, in turn, that citizens' views about the fairness of procedures focus on opportunities to speak rather than on actual control over decisions. This focus on voice probably results from socialization. In the terminology of Crosby and Clayton [(1986) “Introduction: The Search for Connections,” Journal of Social Issues, 42(2), 1–9], people's societal values may override their experiences with their current objective situation in the development of their views about society. As a result, objectively unjust procedures may be viewed as fair.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 95 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.