Sergiu Baltatescu University of Oradea, Romania bsergiu@uoradea.ro

1. Justice beliefs in post-communist countries and subjective well-being. A European comparative study. Sergiu Baltatescu University of Oradea, Romania bsergiu@uoradea.ro “Social Justice in a Changing World”, Bremen, 10–12 March 2005.

2. Social justice research: variables used • Justice feelings/perceptions • Perceptions of social inequalities • Injustice at work/school/… • Justice beliefs • Belief in a just world • Equality/Equity/Need

3. Subjective well-being • Is a measure of the individual and societal output • Has two levels: • global (subjective well-being, life satisfaction) • sectorial (satisfaction with job, family, political system) • Two dimensions: • Cognitive (life satisfaction). • Hedonic (happiness, positive & negative affect).

4. Justice feelings & beliefs and subjective well-being outcomes • Perceived injustice • was found to diminish happiness (Scher, 1997) (Krehbiel & Cropanzano, 2000) • The outcome may be mediated by some factors summarized in the Dispositional Sensitivity to Befallen Injustice (Schmitt, 1996)

5. Justice feelings & beliefs and subjective well-being outcomes • Personal belief in a just world • positively correlated with one's life satisfaction (Lipkus et al., 1996) • those variables are “in an adaptive relationship”. (Dalbert, 1999, 2002) • For victims of an adverse fate, for example, BJW seemed to protect from ruminating about "why me.".

6. Justice feelings & beliefs and subjective well-being outcomes • “justice evaluations are a salient determinant of the subjective well-being of individuals” (Wegener & Steinmann, 1995). • Tested only for satisfaction with material well-being  a particular domain of global subjective well-being. • Growing inequalities were found to diminish subjective well-being (Alesina, di Tella & MacCulloch, 2001).

7. Justice feelings & beliefs and subjective well-being outcomes • Equality of income in a society is a good predictor for the subjective well-being in a nation. (Diener, Diener, & Diener, 1995). (Alesina, di Tella & MacCulloch, 2001). • O'Connell (2004) finds a positive correlation across four years in the 15 EU countries • Proposed interpretation: egalitarian societies are more satisfying for their members, because of: • greater social cohesion • more challenging work opportunities for a greater proportion of individuals.

8. How to interpret correlation? Implication: A society with no big inequalities is theoreticallymore livable. Livability (Veenhoven 1993) is one of the most important explanatory theories for the variations in subjective well-being.

9. How to interpret correlation? • Alesina et al. (2001): this does not apply in the US. • Explanation: differences between social mobility between US and Europe. • Europe: lower social mobility of the poor  bad prospects for the future income. • Alesina et al. (2001): Europeans are not more equalitarian than US! • Other factors in US: perceptions of equal opportunity in society.

10. JUSTICE BELIEFS IN POST-COMMIUNIST STATES • Hypotheses for the comparative research: there may be important differences in choices of justice principles between East and West: more egalitarianism in the Eastern Europe, • Explanations: existing differences between • political • economical experiences • Arts (1995): these are frames that determines the beliefs: In Eastern Europe, state promotes more equality. • different causal models for the justice beliefs for the East and the West.

11. JUSTICE BELIEFS IN POST-COMMIUNIST STATES • Peoples express simultaneously egalitarian and inegalitarian justice beliefs. • This finding is more pronounced in the post-communist states. • Kluegel (1995): lack of crystallization, compared with Western European states where the differences between these attitudes were four a longer period debated.

12. Hypotheses • Peoples in post-communist states will display higher egalitarianism and lower adherence to equity principle. • Correlation between types of justice beliefs is higher in post-communist states • There is a correlation between equalitarian belief and subjective well-being • This correlation holds even when controlling for income inequality

13. Data & Method European Values Survey 1999-2000 • 41125 cases • 33 countries Variables: • Life satisfaction (1-10 scale) “All things considered, how satisfied are you with your life as a whole these days?”

14. Variables: “justice beliefs” • Respondents asked to evaluate the importance of each of the following statements about what a society should provide in order to be considered ‘just’: • Eliminating large inequalities in income among citizens (‘equality’). • Guaranteeing that basic needs are met for all, in terms of food, housing, clothing, education, health (‘need’). • Recognizing people on their merits (‘equity’). • Scale: 1‘very important’, 2 ‘important’, 3 ‘neitherimportant nor unimportant’, 4 ‘unimportant’,5 ‘not at all important’)  reversed.

15. Country clusters • Theoretically grouped in three clusters • recent common socio-historical conditions • similarities with respect to examined variables. • Member of EU15 + Malta, Norway & Iceland. • Central and Eastern European, member of EU 25 & candidate countries (including Turkey). • Former soviet republics: Russia, Belarus, Ukraine

16. Country means: Western & South Europe

17. Country means: Western & South Europe • North/South division: • Northern countries (Denmark, Sweden, Net-herlands) less supporting equality principle. • Southern countries more equalitarian. • Outlier: Malta • Similar levels for need principle.

18. Country means: Central & Eastern Europe + Turkey

19. Country means: comparative

20. Country means: comparative • Hypothesis 1 is partially confirmed • Overall, citizens of post-communist countries have higher adherence to the equality principle. • Exception: former soviet states, with very low levels • Not predicted from the theory: post-communist countries have also higher adherence to the equity principle (former soviet states, with lowest levels). • Tentative explanation: experience of the transition brings frustration  sensation that they don’t get what they deserve. (Generalized corruption is an objective cause)

21. Individual-level correlation between support for equality and support for equity ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). n.s. non significant

22. Individual-level correlation between support for equality and support for equity • Hypothesis 2 is partially confirmed • Overall, post-communist countries have higher correlations. • Exception: former soviet states, with very low correlations • Outliers: Portugal, Germany • The rank-order of countries is similar with that of country means for equalitarism

23. R= -0,668

24. R = -0.460 • When excluding outliers: Estonia, Lithuania, Bulgaria, correlation becomes -0,81

25. r = -1.000

27. How to interpret correlation? • I

28. Inequality & Life satisfaction Overall correlation R2= -0,225

29. Inequality & egalitarianism Overall correlation R2= -0.212

30. Partial correlation When controlling Gini index correlation between life satisfaction and remains significant.

31. Path diagram

32. Path diagram - Western European countries (mostly EU members) -0.054 n.s. (-0.291) 0.487 -0.709 (-0.683)

33. Path diagram – Eastern European (Mostly EU acceding countries)+ Turkey -0.445 (-0.481) 0.114 -0.316 (-0.367)

34. Conclusions • Citizens of post-communist countries have higher adherence to the equality principle, whith the exception of former soviet states. • They have also higher adherence to the equity principle. (unpredicted by the theory) • As a result, the individual-level correlation between first two options are higher than in case of Western European States. • This may be explained by lack of cristalization of the opinions, but also by a different social configuration.

35. Conclusions • There is a correlation between equalitarian belief and subjective well-being. There is a correlation between equalitarian belief and subjective well-being • This correlation holds even when controlling for income inequality, and is lower in the case of post-communist countries and null for the former soviet states. • No direct influence of inequality on life satisfaction.

36. References • ***. (2003). European Values Study 1999/2000 [Computer file] 2003 / Release 1 • Alesina, A., Tella, R. D., & MacCulloch, R. (2001). Inequality and Happiness: Are Europeans and Americans Different? NBER Working Paper No. 8198. • Arts, W., Hermkens, P., & Wijck, P. v. (1995). Justice Evaluation of Income Distribution in East and West. In J. R. Kluegel, D. S. Mason & B. Wegener (Eds.), Social justice and political change : public opinion in capitalist and post-communist states (pp. 131-150). New York: A. de Gruyter.

37. References • Dalbert, C. (1992). Belief in a Just World as Source of Subjective Well-Being. International Journal of Psychology, 27(3-4), 608-609. • Dalbert, C. (1998). Belief in a just world, well-being, and coping with an unjust fate. In L. Montada & M. J. Lerner (Eds.), Responses to victimizations and belief in a just world. (pp. 87-105): Plenum Press. • Dalbert, C. (1999). The World is More Just for Me than Generally: About the Personal Belief in a Just World Scale's Validity., Social Justice Research (Vol. 12, pp. 79-98): Kluwer Academic Publishing. • Dalbert, C., & Maes, J. r. (2002). Belief in a just world as a personal resource in school. In M. Ross & D. T. Miller (Eds.), Justice motive in everyday life. (pp. 365-381): Cambridge University Press.

38. References • Diener, E., Diener, M., & Diener, C. (1995). Factors Predicting the Subjective Well-Being of Nations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 851-864. • Kluegel, J. R., & Mateju, P. (1995). Egalitarian vs. Inegalitarian Principles of Distributive Justice. In J. R. Kluegel, D. S. Mason & B. Wegener (Eds.), Social justice and political change : public opinion in capitalist and post-communist states (pp. 209-). New York: A. de Gruyter. • Krehbiel, P. J., & Cropanzano, R. (2000). Procedural Justice, Outcome Favorability and Emotion., Social Justice Research (Vol. 13, pp. 339-360): Kluwer Academic Publishing. • Lipkus, I. M., & Others, A. (1996). The Importance of Distinguishing the Belief in a Just World for Self Versus for Others: Implication for Psychological Well-Being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(7), 666-677.

39. References • O'Connell, M. (2004). Fairly satisfied: Economic equality, wealth and satisfaction. Journal of Economic Psychology, 25(3), 297-305. • Scher, S. J. (1997). Measuring the consequences of injustice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(5), 482-497. • Schmitt, M. (1996). Individual differences in sensitivity to befallen injustice (SBI). Personality and Individual Differences, 21(1), 3-20. • Veenhoven, R. (1993). Happiness in nations : subjective appreciation of life in 56 nations, 1946-1992. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Erasmus University of Rotterdam, Department of Social Sciences, RISBO, Center for Socio-Cultural Transformation. • Wegener, B., & Steinmann, S. (1995). Justice Psychophysics in the Real World: Comparing Income Justice and Income Satisfaction in East and West Germany. In J. R. Kluegel, D. S. Mason & B. Wegener (Eds.), Social justice and political change : public opinion in capitalist and post-communist states (pp. 151-175). New York: A. de Gruyter.