Examining the Affects of Belief In A Just World Theory on one’s Judgments and Perceptions

Undergraduate college students attending the University of the Pacific were recruited to participate in a study examining the affect of the Just World Theory on one’s perceptions and judgments. Initially, participants completed Rubin & Peplau’s (1975) Belief in a Just World Scale to estimate how just they view the world to be. Participants were then exposed to one of three mock police interviews regarding a sexual assault which were framed to blame the victim, blame the offender or blame neither (neutral condition). The vignette which was centered around blaming the victim discussed how the victim was at fault because of the clothes worn or how intoxicated the victim was. The second vignette of blaming the offender explained how the offender was the one intoxicated and was aggressive and the victim was an innocent person. The third and neutral vignette simply stated brief facts about the case. A 6 point Likert scale survey was utilized to measure their support toward either the victim or the offender. Each vignette was followed by a survey which consisted of 3 questions each. Following the established theory of Belief in a Just World, it was hypothesized that participants who reported to believe in a just world would place more blame on the victim after exposure to any of the mock interviews, even when framed to blame the offender. It was also estimated that female participants would empathize more with the victim and therefore be less likely to place blame on the female victim