Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Three studies examined whether the concern for justice can be a genuine determinant of attitudes toward affirmative action (AA) or whether justice-based opposition merely masks prejudice.In line with the hypothesis of justice as a cause, we found that, independent of their level of prejudice, people were opposed to AA programs that violate distributive and procedural justice norms, as a result of genuine beliefs in the principles of fairness that the programs violate.Nevertheless, in line with the hypothesis of justice as a rationalization, we also found that people's prejudice level was positively associated with opposition to AA programs that were not explicitly justice violating; moreover, the effect of prejudice was mediated through the tendency to construe these programs as justice violating.The present research has implications for understanding attitudes toward social policies where it is possible that justice concerns could be a genuine source of opposition or a rationalization of prejudice.In recent years, the societal debate about policies on such issues as immigration, affirmative action (AA), or bilingualism has become increasingly polarized.Consider the case of AA: On the one hand, many opponents claim that AA is unfair, because such policies consider people's membership in particular social categories in addition to traditional indices of deservingness when allocating desired outcomes (e.g., jobs, promotions, or university admission).On the other hand, many advocates allege that people who oppose AA in the name of fairness are in fact prejudiced.Whereas some people clearly recognize that prejudice and justice concerns might be independent sources of opposition to a number of social policies, much of the rhetoric suggests that what is purportedly justice-based opposition is not genuine but rather a rationalization of prejudice.~ Is the concern for justice a genuine determinant of attitudes toward social policies, such as AA, or do claims of unfairness
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bobocel et al. (1998) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: