Temporoparietal junction

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporoparietal_junction 

 

Temporoparietal junction
Side view of the human brain. TPJ is indicated by red circle.
Side view of the human brain. TPJ is indicated by red circle.
Identifiers
Acronym(s)	TPJ
NeuroLex ID	nlx_144255

The temporoparietal junction (TPJ) is an area of the brain where the temporal and parietal lobes meet, at the posterior end of the lateral sulcus (Sylvian fissure). The TPJ incorporates information from the thalamus and the limbic system as well as from the visual, auditory and somatosensory systems. The TPJ also integrates information from both the external environment as well as from within the body. The TPJ is responsible for collecting all of this information and then processing it.

This area is also known to play a crucial role in self–other distinctions processes and theory of mind (ToM). Furthermore, damage to the TPJ has been implicated in having adverse effects on an individual's ability to make moral decisions and has been known to produce out-of-body experiences (OBEs). Electromagnetic stimulation of the TPJ can also cause these effects. Apart from these diverse roles that the TPJ plays, it is also known for its involvement in a variety of widespread disorders including amnesia, Alzheimer's disease, autism spectrum disorder and schizophrenia.

Anatomy and function

Animation. Both left and right temporoparietal junctions are shown in red.

The brain contains four main lobes: temporal lobe, parietal lobe, frontal lobe and the occipital lobe. The temporoparietal junction lies in the region between the temporal and parietal lobes, near the lateral sulcus (Sylvian fissure). Specifically, it is composed of the inferior parietal lobule and the caudal parts of the superior temporal sulcus. There are two halves to the temporoparietal junction, with each component in their respective hemispheres of the brain. Each half of the TPJ pertains to various aspects of cognitive function. Often, however, the separate halves of the TPJ will work in coordination. The TPJ is mainly involved in information processing and perception.

Right temporoparietal junction

The right temporoparietal junction (rTPJ) is involved in the processing of information in terms of the ability of an individual to pay attention. Evidence from neuroimaging studies as well as lesion studies revealed that the rTPJ plays a pivotal role in analyzing signals from self-produced actions as well as with signals from the external environment. For example, an individual with lesions in their rTPJ would more than likely exhibit a sense of hemi-neglect, wherein they would no longer be able to pay attention to anything they observe on the left. So, if someone were to have a lesion in their rTPJ, then over time the awareness of the left limbs may fade without treatment. Visual signals provide the sensory information necessary for the brain to process spatial recognition of the world. When vision is limited, knowledge of existence begins to fade away since as far as the brain is concerned the object does not exist. Furthermore, the rTPJ plays a role in the way individuals observe and process information, thus impacting social interaction. Empathy and sympathy require an individual to simultaneously distinguish between different possible perspectives on the same situation. Imaging studies show that this ability depends upon the coordinated interaction of the rTPJ to identify and process the social cues presented to it. This rapid process allows for an individual to quickly react to situations.

Left temporoparietal junction

The left temporoparietal junction (lTPJ) contains both Wernicke's area and the angular gyrus, both prominent anatomical structures of the brain that are involved in language cognition, processing, and comprehension of both written and spoken language. This is the region of the brain wherein “Mentalese”, a term coined by Steven Pinker to explain the brain's language that translates itself into written and spoken language, is processed. According to Pinker, “knowing a language is knowing how to translate Mentalese into a string of words and vice versa.” The lTPJ succeeds in this matter by taking in observations from external environments, such as conversations, making connections in the brain regarding past memories or incidents and then converting those thoughts and connections to written and spoken language. Pinker explains this in detail in The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language. The lTPJ also plays an important role in reasoning of other's beliefs, intentions, and desires. Activation of the lTPJ was observed in patients processing mental states such as beliefs when an fMRI was used on patients as they were asked to make inferences regarding the mental states of others such as lying. This study was further supplemented by a study which identified that lesions to the left TPJ can impair cognitive processes specifically involved in the inference of someone else's belief, intention, or desire. Individuals with lesions in the lTPJ were no longer able to correctly identify when someone was lying or insinuating a false sense of belief or desire. The lTPJ is also involved in the processing of associating and remembering the names of individuals and objects.

Disorders

The dopaminergic-serotonergic system mediates our ability to distinguish and understand others’ beliefs as well as predict their behavior in light of that understanding. In certain disorders involving the dopaminergic-serotonergic system, this mentalizing process is disrupted and part or all of the process is impaired; this includes amnesia, Alzheimer's disease, and schizophrenia.

Amnesia

Amnesia is a deficit in memory caused by brain damage, disease, or physiological trauma. Amnesia is best understood via Henry Molaison, or patient H.M., who suffered from severe epilepsy and eventually had a temporal lobectomy. After surgery, his epilepsy improved but then he had anterograde amnesia, wherein long-term memory formation is inhibited. Short-term memory remained normal except that he could never remember anything that had happened after his surgery for very long. Based on general known roles of the TPJ, it is known that the TPJ is involved in the memory processing system of the body. Studies have also revealed that certain types of epileptic amnesia could be attributed to TPJ. fMRI studies indicated that there was lower activation of the rTPJ in patients with epileptic amnesia. Furthermore, it was noticed the autobiographical memories were affected in these patients. As such, the rTPJ along with the right cerebellum were identified as core components of autobiographical memory.

In terms of treatment, most forms of amnesia fix themselves without actually undergoing treatment. However, options such as cognitive therapy or occupational therapy have proved to help. Therapy will focus on various methods to improve a patient's memory and with repetition over time, a patient's memory as a whole will improve and eventually become close to normal.

Alzheimer's disease

Alzheimer's disease is the most common form of dementia and is also the sixth leading cause of death in the United States. This disease has no known cure and is a disease that worsens as it progresses and eventually leads to death. Reduced metabolism in the TPJ, along with the superior frontal sulcus, correlates with Alzheimer's patients’ inability to perceive themselves as others do (with a third-person point of view); the discrepancy between a patient's understanding of their own cognitive impairment and the actual extent of their cognitive impairment increases as metabolism in the TPJ decreases. Additionally, the TPJ contains the praxicon, a dictionary of representations of different human actions, which is necessary to distinguishing between actions of the self and other people. Because dementia (including Alzheimer's) patients with anosognosia are unable to distinguish between the normal actions of other people and their own diminished abilities, it is expected that damage to the TPJ is arresting this cognitive function.

In terms of treatment options for managing the symptoms of Alzheimer's, current options include pharmaceuticals, psychosocial intervention, caregiving, and feeding tubes. Current pharmaceuticals are either acetylcholinesterase inhibitors or an NMDA receptor antagonist. Psychosocial interventions are used to supplement pharmaceutical usage as it can take some time to get used to. Since Alzheimer's disease does eventually lead to death with the condition worsening over time, all family members can really do is provide care for those afflicted and try to make their lives as easy as possible as the situation worsens.

Autism spectrum disorder

There may be a connection between the temporoparietal junction and how individuals with autism spectrum disorder's recognition of socially awkward situations may differ from neurotypicals’. Research reported in 2015 from an experiment in which participants, high-functioning adults with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and neurotypical (NT) controls, were asked to watch socially awkward situations (a complete episode of the sitcom The Office) under an fMRI, which measured their brain activity. Several brain regions implicated in social perceptual and cognitive processes were of interest: "the dorsal, middle and ventral parts of medial prefrontal cortex (DMPFC, MMPFC and VMPFC), right and left temporo-parietal junctions (RTPJ and LTPJ), right superior temporal sulcus (RSTS) and temporal pole, and posterior medial cortices [posterior cingulate, precuneus (PC)]." In general, participants’ activity in several of those brain regions tracked the episode's socially awkward moments to similar extents—the results were evidence of a lack of group difference except in one region: their activity near the RTPJ, spanning into the posterior end of the RSTS, showed notable quantitative differences between the ASD and NT groups (with ASD group showing lower activity).

Research reported in 2016 on ASD-related structural or physiological differences found using neuroimaging noted that results are often inconsistent across the literature, which could be caused by a variety of variance sources. (Re-)analysis using a technique they developed to reduce one common external source of variance showed group differences in TPJ. However, although statistically significant, results did not display the discriminative power sufficient to classify diagnostic groups, instead yielding accuracy results close to random. They concluded that ASD is a highly heterogeneous syndrome/diagnostic category whose differences from NT controls are difficult to characterize globally using neuroimaging.

Schizophrenia

The decreased ability for schizophrenia patients to function in social situations has been related to a deficit within the theory of mind process. There have been relatively few studies that have examined the role of theory of mind in schizophrenia patients; the findings of these studies as they relate to the activation of the TPJ are varied. Some studies have found decreased activation of the TPJ in schizophrenia patients who were asked to make inferences about other peoples' social intentions based on cartoons; other studies, however, performed similar assessments of schizophrenia patients and found that the TPJ actually became hyperactive, compared to control individuals without schizophrenia, in the TPJ. This indicates that there is abnormal activation of the TPJ in these patients while performing tasks that involving understanding social intention of others, but the directionality of this abnormal activity is not clear, or possibly not universal throughout schizophrenia patients. It was found that the changes in activation in the TPJ were lateralized; they found that there was reduced activity in only the right TPJ and proposed that based on previous research about the different roles of the right and left TPJ the findings indicated that there was a more general deficit in the overall mentalizing process for these patients, but their ability to understand other individuals' basic social intentions through observing interaction is not impaired.

A study found that there was a connection between the auditory hallucinations in schizophrenia and the TPJ; the TPJ has been determined as a critical node in the auditory-verbal hallucination system. This study found that there was a significant decrease in the connectivity between the left TPJ and the right hemispheric homotope of the Broca's area, which is related to the production of language that is also characteristic of AVH events. This aspect of impairment seen in schizophrenia patients may also be related to the involvement of the TPJ with producing out of body experiences.

Anxiety disorders

A recent study showed reduced activity in the TPJ of adolescents compared to adults during an extinction task, suggesting a role for the TPJ in anxiety disorders.

Future of possible treatments

Vasopressin is a neuropeptide that is involved in regulating social behaviors, including social memory and recognition. One study examined the connection between vasopressin and cortical areas that are involved in processing social interactions including the TPJ. This study looked specifically at the brain regions that were active in men who were given vasopressin and tested based on familiarity related tasks. They found that the introduction of vasopressin caused a localized specific change in social recognition-related activity in the left TPJ/Brodmann area 39; the presence of vasopressin diminishes the heightened activity in the left TPJ that is present upon exposure to an unfamiliar social stimulus indicating that the presence of vasopressin leads individuals to associate an unfamiliar face with a familiar category more readily. While recognizing that this is the first study that has looked into this connection, the authors propose that it has potential to lead into further research about regulating the TPJ with vasopressin or a similar compound, which could allow pharmacologists to target this area of the brain and help with certain disorders including autism, social anxiety disorder. Perhaps such an approach could also be used to treat certain symptoms of schizophrenia or other disorders with know social cognitive impairments.

Current research

Current research involving the TPJ is extensive, ranging from issues of physiology to issues of mental state. A wide range of cognitive processes rely on the TPJ and as such gaining information about it is crucial. Research is conducted by studying the role TPJ plays both with and without lesions when stimulated. Research concerns various issues such as theory of mind, out-of-body experiences, temporal order judgments, morality, etc. This is a growing field due to the prevalence of ailments that involve TPJ as well as because of the importance of perception in everyday life.

Theory of mind

Theory of mind requires the collaboration of functionally related regions of the brain to form the distinction between self and other mental states and to create a comprehensive understanding of those mental states so that we may recognize, understand, and predict behavior. In general the theory of mind process is mediated by the dopaminergic-serotonergic system, which involves the TPJ as well as other associative regions necessary for mentalizing. Recent studies suggest that both the left TPJ, working in conjunction with the frontal cortex, and the right TPJ are involved in the representation of mental states; furthermore they suggest that the TPJ is particularly active in making the distinction between the mental states of self and others. A study in Nature Neuroscience from 2004 describes how the TPJ is involved in processing socially relevant cues including gaze direction and goal-directed action and also explains that results from the study show that lesions to this area of the brain result in an impaired ability to detect another persons belief. Moreover, studies have reported an increase in activity in the TPJ when patients are absorbing information through reading or images regarding other peoples' beliefs but not while observing information about physical control stimuli. Some studies, however, have shown that the TPJ, along with the cingulate cortex, is more specifically involved with attributing beliefs, but the process of mentalizing more generally is associated more with the medial prefrontal cortex. Another study in Current Biology from 2012 identifies the importance of the TPJ in both low-level, such as simple discrimination, and high-level, such as the ability to empathize, sociocognitive operations. In July 2011, a review from Neuropsychologia presented a model of the mentalizing network that established that mental states are first detected in the TPJ. The TPJ is composed of two discrete anatomical regions, the inferior parietal lobule (IPL) and the caudal parts of the superior temporal sulcus (pSTS), and both are active in the process of distinction between mental states of different individuals; thus, it is probable that this detection is the outcome of the combination and coordination of these two parts. Additionally, the right TPJ is involved in the ventral attention stream and contributes to the ability to focus attention on a particular stimuli or objective. It has also been observed that the interaction and communication between the dorsal and ventral streams involves the TPJ.

Out-of-body experiences

The TPJ is also a crucial structure for self-processing. Several neuro-imaging studies have shown an activation of the TPJ during different aspects of self-processing such as visuo-spatial perspective, self-other distinction, mental own body imagery, and vestibular and multi sensory integration. Damage in the TPJ has been linked to out-of-body experiences (OBEs), the feeling that one's self is located outside one's physical body.

An OBE is defined by the presence of three characteristics: disembodiment, the impression of seeing the world from a distant and elevated visuo-spatial perspective, and the impression of seeing one's own body from this elevated perspective. OBEs mostly occur to people with epilepsy or migraines, but approximately 10% of the healthy population also experience OBEs once or twice in a lifetime. They usually occur spontaneously and are of short duration, making OBEs hard to study. Here is an example of a patient describing what he or she experienced during an OBE:

“I was in bed and about to fall asleep when I had the distinct impression that “I” was at the ceiling level looking down at my body in the bed. I was very startled and frightened; immediately [afterward] I felt that, I was consciously back in the bed again.”

It is suggested that OBEs are caused by multi-sensory disintegration in the TPJ disrupting different aspects of self-processing such as illusory reduplication, illusory self-location, and illusory perspective. The brain integrates different sensory inputs to create a representation of one’s body and its location in its surrounding. Some inhibition of discrepant inputs is required to have coherency, but in some cases, those discrepant inputs are so strong and come from more than one sensory source that it leads to two different representations of one’s own body. This multi-sensory disintegration at the TPJ leads to OBEs. An electromagnetic stimulation to the right TPJ of an patient with epilepsy induced an OBE. The author also states that these experiences are closely related to schizophrenia and phantom limb.

Temporal order judgement

Temporal order is the arrangement of events in time. By judging this, one can understand how we process things. Temporal order judgments require an individual to determine the relative timing between two spatially separate events. One study revealed that subjects had to determine the order of appearance of two objects as well as which object fit a certain property better. What was learned from this study was that when identifying the order or appearance, fMRI studies showed that there was bilateral activation of the TPJ. Meanwhile, when it comes to object characterization based on a property, it was noticed that there was only activation of the lTPJ. As such, it is evident that TPJ is involved in the “when” pathway of the brain.

Morality

Part of judging how virtuous an action was, whether someone is a "good person" or what one ought to do, morality usually (among other considerations) differentiates by actor intention. This applies to self-assessment as well as of others.

Connections made at the TPJ help an individual understand their emotions: the TPJ allows association of emotions with events or individuals, aiding in any related decision making process. Studies also show a relation between theory of mind and moral judgment, which further implicates the rTPJ in morality cognition.

However, errors in this emotional processing can arise when patients have lesions in the TPJ or when the brain is electrically stimulated. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to the rTPJ seems to affect the ability of an individual, when they make moral decisions, to consider actors’ mental states. Patients’ general ability to judge moral scenarios was not obviously impaired, but it did seem to specifically affect how much they integrated a protagonist's belief into the judgement—only affecting the judgement of a scenario in which the protagonist explicitly intends and so deliberately acts to cause significant harm but completely fails solely due to an incorrect belief (about tool/weapon used). TMS can be used to disrupt neural activity in the rTPJ just before a patient was to make a moral decision or during that decision making process—constituting two different testing environments, but experimental results were unaffected.

 

Emotional reasoning

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_reasoning 

Emotional reasoning is a cognitive process by which an individual concludes that their emotional reaction proves something is true, despite contrary empirical evidence. Emotional reasoning creates an 'emotional truth', which may be in direct conflict with the inverse 'perceptional truth'. It can create feelings of anxiety, fear, and apprehension in existing stressful situations, and as such, is often associated with or triggered by panic disorder or anxiety disorder. For example, even though a spouse has shown only devotion, a person using emotional reasoning might conclude, "I know my spouse is being unfaithful because I feel jealous."

This process amplifies the effects of other cognitive distortions. For example, a student may feel insecure about their understanding of test material even though they are capable of answering the questions. If said student acts on their insecurity about failing the test, they might make the assumption that they misunderstand the material and therefore may guess answers randomly, causing their own failure in a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Emotional reasoning is related to other similar concepts, such as: motivated reasoning, a type of reasoning wherein individuals reach conclusions from bias instead of empirical motivations; emotional intelligence, which relates to the ways in which individuals use their emotions to understand situations or the information and reach conclusions; and cognitive distortion or cognitive deficiency, wherein individuals misinterpret situations or make decisions without considering a range of consequences.

Origin

Emotional reasoning, as a concept, was first introduced by psychiatrist Aaron Beck. It was included as a part of Beck's broader research topic: cognitive distortions and depression. To counteract cognitive distortions, Beck developed a type of therapy formally known as cognitive therapy, which became associated with cognitive-behavioral therapy. Emotional reasoning had been attributed to automatic thinking, but Beck believed that it stemmed from negative thoughts that were uncontrollable and happened without effort. This reasoning has been commonly accepted over the years. Most recently, a new explanation states that an "activating agent" or sensory trigger from the environment increases emotional arousal. With this increase in arousal, certain areas of the brain are inhibited. The combination of an increase in emotional arousal and the inhibition of parts of the brain leads to emotional reasoning.

Treatment

Before seeking professional help, an individual can influence the effect that emotional reasoning has on them based on his or her coping method. Using a proactive, problem-focused coping style is more effective at reducing stress and deterring stressful events. Additionally, having good social support also leads to lower psychological stress. If an individual chooses to seek professional help, a psychologist will often use cognitive-behavioural therapy to teach the patient how to challenge their cognitive distortions, including emotional reasoning. In this approach, the automatic thoughts that control emotional reasoning are identified, studied, and reasoned through by the patient. In doing so, the psychologist hopes to change the automatic thoughts of the patient and reduce the patient's stress levels. Cognitive behavioural therapy has been generally regarded as the most-effective method of treatment for emotional reasoning.

Most recently, a new therapeutic approach uses the RIGAAR method to reduce emotional stress. RIGAAR is an abbreviation for: rapport building, information gathering, goal setting, accessing resources, agreeing strategies and rehearsing success.

Reducing emotional arousal is also suggested by the human givens approach in order to counter emotional reasoning. High emotional arousal inhibits brain regions necessary for logical complex reasoning. With less emotional arousal, cognitive reasoning is less affected and it is easier for the subject to disassociate reality from emotions.

Factors

Cognitive schemas is one of the factors to cause emotional reasoning. Schema is made of how we look at this world and our real-life experiences. Schema helps us remember the important things or events that happened in our lives. The result of the learning process is the schema, and it is also made by classical and operant conditioning. For example, an individual can develop a schema about terrorists and spiders that are very dangerous. Based on their schema, people can change what they think or how they are biased about the way they perceive things. Information-processing biases of schema impact how a person thinks and remembers, and their understanding of experiences and information. The bias makes a person's schema automatically access similar content of schema. For example, a person with rat phobia if more likely to visualize or perceive a rat being near them. Schemas also easily connect with schema-central stimuli. For example, when depressed people start to think about negative things, it can be very difficult for them to think of anything positive.

For memory bias, schema can affect an individual's recollections to cause schema-incongruent memories. For example, if individuals have a schema about how intelligent they are, failure-related recollections have a high chance to be retained in their minds and they become likely to recall positive past events. The schema also make individuals biased through the way that they interpret information. In other words, schema alters their understanding of the information. For example, when people refuse to help low self-esteem children solve a math problem, the children may think they are too stupid to learn how to solve the problem rather than the other people being too busy to help.

Reduction techniques

Techniques for reducing emotional reasoning include:

• Validity testing: Patients defend their thoughts and ideas using objective evidence to support their assumptions. If they cannot, they might be exposed to emotional reasoning.
• Cognitive reversal: Patients are told of a difficult situation that they had in the past, and work with a therapist to help them address and correct their problems. This can prepare the patient for similar situations so that they do not revert to emotional reasoning.
• Guided discovery: The therapist asks the patients a series of questions designed to help them realize their cognition distortions.
• Writing in a journal: Patients form a habit of writing in a journal to record the situations they face, emotions and thoughts they experience, and their responses or behaviors to them. The therapist and patient then analyze how the patient's maladaptive thought patterns influence their behaviors.
• Homework: Once the patient acquires the ability to perform self-recovery and remember the insights gained from therapy sessions, the patient is tasked with reviewing sessions and reading related books to focus their thoughts and behaviors, which are recorded and reviewed for the next therapy session.
• Modeling: The therapist could use role-playing to act in different ways in response to imagined situations so that patients could understand and model their behavior. 
  
• Systematic positive reinforcement: The behavior-oriented therapist would use a reward system (systematic positive reinforcement) to motivate patients to reinforce specific behaviors.

Negative memories and stressful life circumstances have a chance to trigger depression. The main factor for causing depression is unresolved life experiences. People who experience emotional reasoning are more likely to connect to depression. Emotion-focused therapy (EFT) is a form of psychotherapy which can help people find a positive perspective of their emotional process. EFT is a research-based treatment that emphasizes emotional change, which is the goal of this therapy. EFT has two different alternative therapies for treatments: cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), which emphasizes changing self-defeating thoughts and behaviors; and interpersonal therapy (IPT), which emphasizes changing people's skills to have better interaction with others.

EFT operates on the understanding that a person's development is influenced by emotional memories and experiences. The purpose of the therapy is to change the emotional process by resurfacing painful emotional experiences and bringing them into awareness. This process helps patients to differentiate between what they experience and the influence of past experiences on how they feel. This can result in greater self-awareness of what they want in their life and enable better decision-making through reducing emotional reasoning. Another purpose of EFT is to promote emotional intelligence, which is the ability to understand their emotions and perceive emotional information, controlling their behavior while responding to problems.

Emotion-focused coping is a way to focus on managing one's emotions to reduce stress and also to reduce the chance to have emotional reasoning. Cognitive therapy is a form of therapy that helps patients recognize their negative thought patterns about themselves and events to revise these thought patterns and change their behavior.  Cognitive-behavioral therapy helps individuals to perform well at cognitive tasks and to help them rethink their situation in a way that can benefit them.^[17] The treatment of cognitive-behavioral therapy is through the process of learning and making the change for maladaptive emotions, thoughts, and behaviors.

Implications

If not treated, debilitating effects can occur, the most common being depression. However, emotional reasoning has the potential to be useful when appraising the outside world and not ourselves. How one feels when assessing an object, person or event, can be an instinctual survival response and a way to adapt to the world. "The amygdala buried deep in the limbic system serves as an early warning device for novelty, precisely so that attention can be mobilized to alert the mind to potential danger and to prepare for a potential of flight or fight."

Praise

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Praise as a form of social interaction expresses recognition, reassurance or admiration. Praise is expressed verbally as well as by body language (facial expression and gestures).

Verbal praise consists of a positive evaluations of another's attributes or actions, where the evaluator presumes the validity of the standards on which the evaluation is based.

As a form of social manipulation, praise becomes a form of reward and furthers behavioral reinforcement by conditioning. The influence of praise on an individual can depend on many factors, including the context, the meanings the praise may convey, and the characteristics and interpretations of the recipient. While praise may share some predictive relationships (both positive and negative) with tangible (material) rewards, praise tends to be less salient and expected, conveys more information about competence, and is typically given more immediately after the desired behavior.

Praise is distinct from acknowledgement or feedback (more neutral forms of recognition) and from encouragement (expressedly future-oriented).

Praise is given across social hierarchy, and both within the ingroup and towards an outgroup; it is an important aspect in the regulation of social hierarchy and the maintenance of group cohesion, influencing the potential for political action and social upheaval. When given by a dominant individual it takes the form of recognition and reassurance, reducing the potential of political action aiming for when given by a submissive to a dominant individual it takes the form of deference, admiration or exultation, or deification. Praise of gods may form part of religious rites and practices (see for example prayer of praise and praise and worship).

As behavioral reinforcement

The concept of praise as a means of behavioral reinforcement is rooted in B.F. Skinner's model of operant conditioning. Through this lens, praise has been viewed as a means of positive reinforcement, wherein an observed behavior is made more likely to occur by contingently praising said behavior. Hundreds of studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of praise in promoting positive behaviors, notably in the study of teacher and parent use of praise on child in promoting improved behavior and academic performance, but also in the study of work performance. Praise has also been demonstrated to reinforce positive behaviors in non-praised adjacent individuals (such as a classmate of the praise recipient) through vicarious reinforcement. Praise may be more or less effective in changing behavior depending on its form, content and delivery. In order for praise to effect positive behavior change, it must be contingent on the positive behavior (i.e., only administered after the targeted behavior is enacted), must specify the particulars of the behavior that is to be reinforced, and must be delivered sincerely and credibly.

Acknowledging the effect of praise as a positive reinforcement strategy, numerous behavioral and cognitive behavioral interventions have incorporated the use of praise in their protocols. The strategic use of praise is recognized as an evidence-based practice in both classroom management and parenting training interventions, though praise is often subsumed in intervention research into a larger category of positive reinforcement, which includes strategies such as strategic attention and behavioral rewards.

Effects beyond behavior change

Although the majority of early research on the influences of praise focused on behavior implications, more recent investigations have highlighted important implications in other domains. Praise may have cognitive influences on an individual, by attracting attention to the self, or by conveying information about the values and expectations of the praiser to the recipient. Effective praise (i.e., praise that is welcomed or accepted by the recipient) may also have positive emotional effects by generating a positive affective state (e.g., happiness, joy, pride). Praise is also thought to convey that one has surpassed a noteworthy evaluative standard, and if the recipient of the praise is likely to experience a sense of pleasure stemming from a positive self-perception. Contrastingly, praise may create negative emotional consequences if it appears disingenuous or manipulative.

Alternative views of the effects of praise on motivation exist. In one camp, praise is thought to decrease intrinsic motivation by increasing the presence of external control. However, praise has also been argued to define standards and expectations, which in turn may motivate an individual to exert effort to meet those standards. Lastly, praise may serve to influence interpersonal relations. For example, strong pressures to reciprocate praise have been found. It is thought that the mutual praise may serve to increase attraction and strengthen the interpersonal relationship, and this process may underlie the use of praise in ingratiation.

Dimensions

Person versus process

Over the past several decades, researchers have distinguished between praise for a person's general abilities and qualities (e.g., "You're such a good drawer.") and for the process of performance (e.g., "You are working so hard at that drawing."). This distinction between person versus process praise is sometimes referred to as ability versus effort praise, though ability and effort statements can be seen as subcategories of person and process statements, respectively.

Traditionally, person(trait)-oriented praise was thought to instill a child's belief that they have the capacity to succeed, and thus help motivate them to learn. However, social-cognitive theorists have more recently suggested that person-oriented (as opposed to process-oriented) praise may have detrimental impacts on a child's self-perceptions, motivation and learning. For example, praising children for their personal attributes, rather than specifics about their performance, may teach them to make interferences about their global worth, and may thus undermine their intrinsic motivation. In a study of person- versus process-oriented praise, Kamins and Dweck found that children who received person-oriented praise displayed more "helpless" responses following a failure including self-blame, than those in the process condition. Henderlong and Lepper suggest that person-oriented praise may function like tangible rewards, in that they produce desired outcomes in the short-run, but may undermine intrinsic motivation and subsequent perseverance. However, Skipper & Douglas found that although person- versus process-oriented praise (and an objective feedback control group) predicted more negative responses to the first failure, all three groups demonstrated similarly negative responses to the second failure. Thus, the long-term negative consequences of person-oriented praise are still unclear.

Person and process (or performance) praise may also foster different attributional styles such that person-oriented praise may lead one to attribute success and failure to stable ability, which in turn may foster helplessness reactions in the face of setbacks. Contrastingly, process praise may foster attributions regarding effort or strategy, such that children attribute their success (or failure) to these variables, rather than their stable trait or ability. This attributional style can foster more adaptive reactions to both success and failure. In support of this notion, Muller and Dweck experimentally found praise for child intelligence to be more detrimental to 5th graders' achievement motivation than praise for effort. Following a failure, the person-praised students displayed less task persistence, task enjoyment, and displayed worse task performance than those praised for effort. These findings are in line with personal theories of achievement striving, in which in the face of failure, performance tends to improve when individuals make attributions to a lack of effort, but worsen when they attribute their failure to a lack of ability.

In the studies mentioned above, person-oriented praise was found to be less beneficial than process-oriented praise, but this is not always found to be the case. Particularly, effort-oriented praise may be detrimental when given during tasks that are exceptionally easy. This may be especially apparent for older children as they see effort and ability to be inversely related and thus an overemphasis on effort may suggest a lack of ability.

Controlling versus informational

Proponents of cognitive evaluation theory (Deci & Ryan) have focused on two aspects of praise thought to influence a child's self-determination: information and control. Taking this perspective, the informational aspect of praise is thought to promote a perceived internal locus of control (and thus greater self-determination) while the controlling aspects promote a perceived external locus of control and thus extrinsic compliance or defiance. Thus, Deci & Ryan  suggest that the effect of praise is moderated by the salience of informational versus controlling aspects of praise.

The theory that informational praise enhances self-determination over controlling praise has been supported by several empirical studies. In a metanalysis including five studies distinguishing informational from controlling praise, Deci, Koestner & Ryan found that informational-based praise related to greater intrinsic motivation (as measured by free-choice behavior and self-reported interest) while controlling praise was associated with less intrinsic motivation. For example, Pittman and colleagues found that adults demonstrated more free-choice engagement with a task after receiving informational ("e.g., "Compared to most of my subjects, you're doing really well."), rather than controlling (e.g., "I haven't been able to use most of the data I've gotten so far, but you're doing really well, and if you keep it up I'll be able to use yours.") praise.

Several complexities of informational versus controlling praise have been acknowledged. First, though the differences between information and controlling praise have been well-established, it is difficult to determine whether the net effects of these forms of praise will be positive, negative or neutral compared to a control condition. In addition, it is often difficult to determine the extent to which informational, controlling, or both, which may muddy interpretations of results.

Social-comparison versus mastery

Social comparison is a psychological process that is widely prevalent, particularly so in educational settings. In Festinger's social comparison theory, he noted that people engage in social comparison as a means to reduce ambiguity and accurately evaluate their own qualities and abilities. However, controversy exists over whether providing children with social-comparison praise has beneficial impact on their motivation and performance. Some studies have demonstrated that students who received social-comparison praise (e.g., "you're doing better than most students" or "you're performance is amongst the best we've had") demonstrated greater motivation compared to no-praise or other control groups. Sarafino, Russo, Barker, Consentino and Titus found that students who received social-comparison voluntarily engaged in the task more so than those who received feedback that they performed similar to others. Though these studies demonstrate the possible positive influence of social-comparison praise, they have been criticized for inadequate control groups. For example, a control group given feedback that they are average may be seen as negative, rather than neutral. In addition, most social-comparison studies do not examine motivation or behavior following a subsequent unsuccessful task.

Beyond methodology, the primary criticism to social-comparison praise is that it teaches children to evaluate themselves on the basis of the performance of others, and may therefore lead to maladaptive coping in situations in which one is outperformed by others individuals. Social-comparison praise has been hypothesized to decrease intrinsic motivation for the praised children because they may then view their behaviors as externally controlled. Contrastingly, it is suggested that praise that focused on a child's competence (mastery) rather than social comparison may be important for fostering motivation. This area is relatively understudied, though some interesting findings have emerged. In a study of adults, Koestner, Zuckerman, and Olsson found that gender moderated the influence of social-comparison and mastery praise, where women were more intrinsically motivated following mastery praise, while men were more motivated following social-comparison praise. In a study of children, Henderlong Corpus, Ogle & Love-Geiger found that social-comparison praise lead to decreased motivation following ambiguous feedback for all children, and also decreased motivation following positive feedback for girls only. Thus, mastery praise may be more conducive than social-comparison to fostering intrinsic motivation, particularly for females, though more research is needed to tease apart these relationships.

Beauty

Beauty is worth praise, "if the praise is directed at the beauty itself without giving credit for having it to the person whose beauty it happens to be.".

Sir Kenneth Dover provides us with clarity over the question of beauty and praise, with his voice on our two main senses giving us the feeling to praise:

The word [kalon], when applied to a person, means ‘beautiful’, ‘pretty’, ‘handsome’, ‘attractive’, and its antonym is aischros, ‘ugly’. The words are also applied to objects, sights and sounds and whatever can be heard about and thought about, such as an institution, an achievement or failure, or a virtuous or vicious action; kalos expresses a favourable reaction (‘admirable’, ‘creditable’, ‘honourable’) and aischros an unfavour-able reaction (‘disgraceful’, ‘repulsive’, ‘contemptible’).

Dover states there is a distinction of aesthetic and the moral senses of the term; "It must be emphasized that the Greeks did not call a person ‘beautiful’ by virtue of that person's morals, intelligence, ability or temperament, but solely by virtue of shape, colour, texture and movement".

Factors that affect influence

Age

The function of praise on child performance and motivation may likely vary as a function of age. Few studies have directly examined developmental differences in praise, though some evidence has been found. Henderlong Corpus & Lepper found person praise (as opposed to process praise) to negatively influence motivation for older girls (4th/5th grade), while for preschool-age children, there were no differences in the effects of process, person and product praise, though all three forms of praise were associated with increased motivation as compared to neutral feedback. In a different study, Henderlong found that for older children, process praise enhanced post-failure motivation more so than person praise, and person praise decreased motivation as compared to neutral feedback. Contrastingly, for preschool-age children process praise enhanced post-failure motivation more than person praise, but both were better than neutral feedback. Some posit that younger children do not experience the negative effects of certain types of praise because they do not yet make causal attributions in complex ways, and they are more literal in their interpretations of adult speech.

Gender

The function of praise on child behavior and motivation has also found to vary as a function of child gender. Some researchers have shown that females are more susceptible to the negative effects of certain types of praise (person-oriented praise, praise that limits autonomy). For example, Koestner, Zuckerman & Koestner found that girls were more negatively influenced by praise that diminished perceived autonomy. Henderlong Corpus and Lepper found that process praise was more beneficial to motivation than person praise, but only for girls. This difference was found for older children, but not preschool-aged children.

Others have found young girls to be more negatively influenced by the evaluations of adults more generally. Some have posited that this gender difference is due to girls more often attributing failure to lack of ability rather than a lack of motivation or effort. Gender differences may be attributable to normative socialization practices, in which people generally emphasize dependence and interpersonal relationships for girls, but achievement and independence for boys.

Culture

Culture has been referred to as a "blind spot" in the praise literature. Yet, there is reason to believe that cultural differences in the effects of praise exist. Much of the discussion on culture and praise has focused on differences between independent and interdependent cultures. Stated briefly, independent cultures, common in Western cultures, generally value and seek to promote individualism and autonomy, while interdependent cultures promote fundamental connectedness and harmony in interpersonal relationships.

Looking through this cultural lens, clear differences in the use and impact of praise can be found. In comparison to the United States, praise is rarely in China and Japan (e.g.), as praise may be thought to be harmful to a child's character. In interdependent cultures, individuals are generally motivated by self-improvement. This cultural difference has also been found experimentally. Heine, Lehman, Markus & Katayama found that Canadian students persisted longer after positive than negative performance feedback, while the opposite was true for Japanese students. Some posit that individuals from independent and interdependent cultures largely express different models of praise (independence-supportive and interdependence-supportive praise.

Blame

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blame

Blame is the act of censuring, holding responsible, making negative statements about an individual or group that their action or actions are socially or morally irresponsible, the opposite of praise. When someone is morally responsible for doing something wrong, their action is blameworthy. By contrast, when someone is morally responsible for doing something right, we may say that his or her action is praiseworthy. There are other senses of praise and blame that are not ethically relevant. One may praise someone's good dress sense, and blame their own sense of style for their own dress sense.

Neurology

Blaming appears to relate to include brain activity in the temporoparietal junction (TPJ). The amygdala has been found to contribute when we blame others, but not when we respond to their positive actions.

Sociology and psychology

Humans - consciously and unconsciously - constantly make judgments about other people. The psychological criteria for judging others may be partly ingrained, negative and rigid indicating some degree of grandiosity.

Blaming provides a way of devaluing others, with the end result that the blamer feels superior, seeing others as less worthwhile making the blamer "perfect". Off-loading blame means putting the other person down by emphasizing his or her flaws.

Victims of manipulation and abuse frequently feel responsible for causing negative feelings in the manipulator/abuser towards them and the resultant anxiety in themselves. This self-blame often becomes a major feature of victim status.

The victim gets trapped into a self-image of victimization. The psychological profile of victimization includes a pervasive sense of helplessness, passivity, loss of control, pessimism, negative thinking, strong feelings of guilt, shame, remorse, self-blame and depression. This way of thinking can lead to hopelessness and despair.

Self-blame

Two main types of self-blame exist:

1. behavioral self-blame – undeserved blame based on actions. Victims who experience behavioral self-blame feel that they should have done something differently, and therefore feel at fault.
2. characterological self-blame – undeserved blame based on character. Victims who experience characterological self-blame feel there is something inherently wrong with them which has caused them to deserve to be victimized.

Behavioral self-blame is associated with feelings of guilt within the victim. While the belief that one had control during the abuse (past control) is associated with greater psychological distress, the belief that one has more control during the recovery process (present control) is associated with less distress, less withdrawal, and more cognitive reprocessing.

Counseling responses found helpful in reducing self-blame include:

• supportive responses
• psychoeducational responses (learning about rape trauma syndrome for example)
• responses addressing the issue of blame.

A helpful type of therapy for self-blame is cognitive restructuring or cognitive–behavioral therapy. Cognitive reprocessing is the process of taking the facts and forming a logical conclusion from them that is less influenced by shame or guilt.

Victim blaming

Victim blaming is holding the victims of a crime, an accident, or any type of abusive maltreatment to be entirely or partially responsible for the incident that has occurred.

Individual blame versus system blame

In sociology individual blame is the tendency of a group or society to hold the individual responsible for his or her situation, whereas system blame is the tendency to focus on social factors that contribute to one's fate.

Blame shifting

Blaming others can lead to a "kick the dog" effect where individuals in a hierarchy blame their immediate subordinate, and this propagates down a hierarchy until the lowest rung (the "dog"). A 2009 experimental study has shown that blaming can be contagious even for uninvolved onlookers.

In complex international organizations, such as national and supranational policies regulations, the blame is usually attributed to the last echelon, the implementing actors.

As a propaganda technique

Labeling theory accounts for blame by postulating that when intentional actors act out to continuously blame an individual for nonexistent psychological traits and for nonexistent variables, those actors aim to induce irrational guilt at an unconscious level. Blame in this case becomes a propaganda tactic, using repetitive blaming behaviors, innuendos, and hyperbole in order to assign negative status to normative humans. When innocent people are blamed fraudulently for nonexistent psychological states and nonexistent behaviors, and there is no qualifying deviance for the blaming behaviors, the intention is to create a negative valuation of innocent humans to induce fear, by using fear mongering. For centuries, governments have used blaming in the form of demonization to influence public perceptions of various other governments, to induce feelings of nationalism in the public. Blame can objectify people, groups, and nations, typically negatively influencing the intended subjects of propaganda, compromising their objectivity. Blame is utilized as a social-control technique.

In organizations

The flow of blame in an organization may be a primary indicator of that organization's robustness and integrity. Blame flowing downwards, from management to staff, or laterally between professionals or partner organizations, indicates organizational failure. In a blame culture, problem-solving is replaced by blame-avoidance. Blame coming from the top generates "fear, malaise, errors, accidents, and passive-aggressive responses from the bottom", with those at the bottom feeling powerless and lacking emotional safety. Employees have expressed that organizational blame culture made them fear prosecution for errors, accidents and thus unemployment, which may make them more reluctant to report accidents, since trust is crucial to encourage accident reporting. This makes it less likely that weak indicators of safety threats get picked up, thus preventing the organization from taking adequate measures to prevent minor problems from escalating into uncontrollable situations. Several issues identified in organizations with a blame culture contradicts high reliability organizations best practices. Organisational chaos, such as confused roles and responsibilities, is strongly associated with blame culture and workplace bullying. Blame culture promotes a risk aversive approach, which prevent from adequately assessing risks.

According to Mary Douglas, blame is systematically used in the micro politics of institutions, with three latent functions: explaining disasters; justifying allegiances, and stabilizing existing institutional regimes. Within a politically stable regime, blame tends to be asserted on the weak or unlucky one, but in a less stable regime, blame shifting may involve a battle between rival factions. Douglas was interested in how blame stabilizes existing power structures within institutions or social groups. She devised a two-dimensional typology of institutions, the first attribute being named "group", which is the strength of boundaries and social cohesion, the second "grid", the degree and strength of the hierarchy. According to Douglas, blame will fall on different entities depending on the institutional type. For markets, blame is used in power struggles between potential leaders. In bureaucracies, blame tends to flow downwards and is attributed to a failure to follow rules. In a clan, blame is asserted on outsiders or involves allegations of treachery, to suppress dissidence and strengthen the group's ties. In the 4th type, isolation, the individuals are facing the competitive pressures of the marketplace alone, in other words there is a condition of fragmentation with a loss of social cohesion, potentially leading to feelings of powerlessness and fatalism, and this type was renamed by various other authors into "donkey jobs". It is suggested that the progressive changes in managerial practices in healthcare is leading to an increase in donkey jobs.

The requirement of accountability and transparency, assumed to be key for good governance, worsen the behaviors of blame avoidance, both at the individual and institutional levels, as is observed in various domains such as politics and healthcare. Indeed, institutions tend to be risk-averse and blame-averse, and where the management of societal risks (the threats to society) and institutional risks (threats to the organizations managing the societal risks) are not aligned, there may be organizational pressures to prioritize the management of institutional risks at the expense of societal risks. Furthermore, "blame-avoidance behaviour at the expense of delivering core business is a well-documented organizational rationality". The willingness of maintaining one's reputation may be a key factor explaining the relationship between accountability and blame avoidance. This may produce a "risk colonization", where institutional risks are transferred to societal risks, as a strategy of risk management. Some researchers argue that there is "no risk-free lunch" and "no blame-free risk", an analogy to the "no free lunch" adage.

Just-world hypothesis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis 

The just-world fallacy or just-world hypothesis is the cognitive bias that a person's actions are inherently inclined to bring morally fair and fitting consequences to that person; thus, it is the assumption that all noble actions are eventually rewarded and all evil actions eventually punished. In other words, the just-world hypothesis is the tendency to attribute consequences to—or expect consequences as the result of—a universal force that restores moral balance. This belief generally implies the existence of cosmic justice, destiny, divine providence, desert, stability, and/or order, and is often associated with a variety of fundamental fallacies, especially in regard to rationalizing people's suffering on the grounds that they "deserve" it.

The hypothesis popularly appears in the English language in various figures of speech that imply guaranteed negative reprisal, such as: "you got what was coming to you", "what goes around comes around", "chickens come home to roost", "everything happens for a reason", and "you reap what you sow". This hypothesis has been widely studied by social psychologists since Melvin J. Lerner conducted seminal work on the belief in a just world in the early 1960s. Research has continued since then, examining the predictive capacity of the hypothesis in various situations and across cultures, and clarifying and expanding the theoretical understandings of just-world beliefs.

Emergence

Many philosophers and social theorists have observed and considered the phenomenon of belief in a just world, going back to at least as early as the Pyrrhonist philosopher Sextus Empiricus, writing circa 180 CE, who argued against this belief. Lerner's work made the just-world hypothesis a focus of research in the field of social psychology.

Melvin Lerner

Lerner was prompted to study justice beliefs and the just-world hypothesis in the context of social psychological inquiry into negative social and societal interactions. Lerner saw his work as extending Stanley Milgram's work on obedience. He sought to answer the questions of how regimes that cause cruelty and suffering maintain popular support, and how people come to accept social norms and laws that produce misery and suffering.

Lerner's inquiry was influenced by repeatedly witnessing the tendency of observers to blame victims for their suffering. During his clinical training as a psychologist, he observed treatment of mentally ill persons by the health care practitioners with whom he worked. Although Lerner knew them to be kindhearted, educated people, they often blamed patients for the patients' own suffering. Lerner also describes his surprise at hearing his students derogate (disparage, belittle) the poor, seemingly oblivious to the structural forces that contribute to poverty. In a study on rewards, he observed that when one of two men was chosen at random to receive a reward for a task, that caused him to be more favorably evaluated by observers, even when the observers had been informed that the recipient of the reward was chosen at random. Existing social psychological theories, including cognitive dissonance, could not fully explain these phenomena. The desire to understand the processes that caused these phenomena led Lerner to conduct his first experiments on what is now called the just-world hypothesis.

Early evidence

In 1966, Lerner and his colleagues began a series of experiments that used shock paradigms to investigate observer responses to victimization. In the first of these experiments conducted at the University of Kansas, 72 female participants watched what appeared to be a confederate receiving electrical shocks under a variety of conditions. Initially, these observing participants were upset by the victim's apparent suffering. But as the suffering continued and observers remained unable to intervene, the observers began to reject and devalue the victim. Rejection and devaluation of the victim was greater when the observed suffering was greater. But when participants were told the victim would receive compensation for her suffering, the participants did not derogate the victim. Lerner and colleagues replicated these findings in subsequent studies, as did other researchers.

Theory

To explain these studies' findings, Lerner theorized that there was a prevalent belief in a just world. A just world is one in which actions and conditions have predictable, appropriate consequences. These actions and conditions are typically individuals' behaviors or attributes. The specific conditions that correspond to certain consequences are socially determined by a society's norms and ideologies. Lerner presents the belief in a just world as functional: it maintains the idea that one can influence the world in a predictable way. Belief in a just world functions as a sort of "contract" with the world regarding the consequences of behavior. This allows people to plan for the future and engage in effective, goal-driven behavior. Lerner summarized his findings and his theoretical work in his 1980 monograph The Belief in a Just World: A Fundamental Delusion.

Lerner hypothesized that the belief in a just world is crucially important for people to maintain for their own well-being. But people are confronted daily with evidence that the world is not just: people suffer without apparent cause. Lerner explained that people use strategies to eliminate threats to their belief in a just world. These strategies can be rational or irrational. Rational strategies include accepting the reality of injustice, trying to prevent injustice or provide restitution, and accepting one's own limitations. Non-rational strategies include denial, withdrawal, and reinterpretation of the event.

There are a few modes of reinterpretation that could make an event fit the belief in a just world. One can reinterpret the outcome, the cause, and/or the character of the victim. In the case of observing the injustice of the suffering of innocent people, one major way to rearrange the cognition of an event is to interpret the victim of suffering as deserving. Specifically, observers can blame victims for their suffering on the basis of their behaviors and/or their characteristics. Much psychological research on the belief in a just world has focused on these negative social phenomena of victim blaming and victim derogation in different contexts.

An additional effect of this thinking is that individuals experience less personal vulnerability because they do not believe they have done anything to deserve or cause negative outcomes. This is related to the self-serving bias observed by social psychologists.

Many researchers have interpreted just-world beliefs as an example of causal attribution. In victim blaming, the causes of victimization are attributed to an individual rather than to a situation. Thus, the consequences of belief in a just world may be related to or explained in terms of particular patterns of causal attribution.

Alternatives

Veridical judgment

Others have suggested alternative explanations for the derogation of victims. One suggestion is that derogation effects are based on accurate judgments of a victim's character. In particular, in relation to Lerner's first studies, some have hypothesized that it would be logical for observers to derogate an individual who would allow himself to be shocked without reason. A subsequent study by Lerner challenged this alternative hypothesis by showing that individuals are only derogated when they actually suffer; individuals who agreed to undergo suffering but did not were viewed positively.

Guilt reduction

Another alternative explanation offered for the derogation of victims early in the development of the just-world hypothesis was that observers derogate victims to reduce their own feelings of guilt. Observers may feel responsible, or guilty, for a victim's suffering if they themselves are involved in the situation or experiment. In order to reduce the guilt, they may devalue the victim. Lerner and colleagues claim that there has not been adequate evidence to support this interpretation. They conducted one study that found derogation of victims occurred even by observers who were not implicated in the process of the experiment and thus had no reason to feel guilty.

Discomfort reduction

Alternatively, victim derogation and other strategies may only be ways to alleviate discomfort after viewing suffering. This would mean that the primary motivation is not to restore a belief in a just world, but to reduce discomfort caused by empathizing. Studies have shown that victim derogation does not suppress subsequent helping activity and that empathizing with the victim plays a large role when assigning blame. According to Ervin Staub, devaluing the victim should lead to lesser compensation if restoring belief in a just world was the primary motive; instead, there is virtually no difference in compensation amounts whether the compensation precedes or follows devaluation. Psychopathy has been linked to the lack of just-world maintaining strategies, possibly due to dampened emotional reactions and lack of empathy.

Additional evidence

After Lerner's first studies, other researchers replicated these findings in other settings in which individuals are victimized. This work, which began in the 1970s and continues today, has investigated how observers react to victims of random calamities like traffic accidents, as well as rape and domestic violence, illnesses, and poverty. Generally, researchers have found that observers of the suffering of innocent victims tend to both derogate and blame victims for their suffering. Observers thus maintain their belief in a just world by changing their cognitions about the victims' character.

In the early 1970s, social psychologists Zick Rubin and Letitia Anne Peplau developed a measure of belief in a just world. This measure and its revised form published in 1975 allowed for the study of individual differences in just-world beliefs. Much of the subsequent research on the just-world hypothesis used these measurement scales.

These studies on victims of violence, illness, and poverty and others like them have provided consistent support for the link between observers' just-world beliefs and their tendency to blame victims for their suffering. As a result, the existence of the just-world hypothesis as a psychological phenomenon has become widely accepted.

Violence

Researchers have looked at how observers react to victims of rape and other violence. In a formative experiment on rape and belief in a just world by Linda Carli and colleagues, researchers gave two groups of subjects a narrative about interactions between a man and a woman. The description of the interaction was the same until the end; one group received a narrative that had a neutral ending and the other group received a narrative that ended with the man raping the woman. Subjects judged the rape ending as inevitable and blamed the woman in the narrative for the rape on the basis of her behavior, but not her characteristics. These findings have been replicated repeatedly, including using a rape ending and a 'happy ending' (a marriage proposal).

Other researchers have found a similar phenomenon for judgments of battered partners. One study found that observers' labels of blame of female victims of relationship violence increase with the intimacy of the relationship. Observers blamed the perpetrator only in the most significant case of violence, in which a male struck an acquaintance.

Bullying

Researchers have employed the just-world hypothesis to understand bullying. Given other research on beliefs in a just world, it would be expected that observers would derogate and blame bullying victims, but the opposite has been found: individuals high in just-world belief have stronger anti-bullying attitudes. Other researchers have found that strong belief in a just world is associated with lower levels of bullying behavior. This finding is in keeping with Lerner's understanding of belief in a just world as functioning as a "contract" that governs behavior. There is additional evidence that belief in a just world is protective of the well-being of children and adolescents in the school environment, as has been shown for the general population.

Illness

Other researchers have found that observers judge sick people as responsible for their illnesses. One experiment showed that persons suffering from a variety of illnesses were derogated on a measure of attractiveness more than healthy individuals were. In comparison to healthy people, victim derogation was found for persons presenting with indigestion, pneumonia, and stomach cancer. Moreover, derogation was found to be higher for those suffering from more severe illnesses, except for those presenting with cancer. Stronger belief in a just world has also been found to correlate with greater derogation of AIDS victims.

Poverty

More recently, researchers have explored how people react to poverty through the lens of the just-world hypothesis. Strong belief in a just world is associated with blaming the poor, with weak belief in a just world associated with identifying external causes of poverty including world economic systems, war, and exploitation.

The self as victim

Some research on belief in a just world has examined how people react when they themselves are victimized. An early paper by Dr. Ronnie Janoff-Bulman found that rape victims often blame their own behavior, but not their own characteristics, for their victimization. It was hypothesized that this may be because blaming one's own behavior makes an event more controllable.

Theoretical refinement

Subsequent work on measuring belief in a just world has focused on identifying multiple dimensions of the belief. This work has resulted in the development of new measures of just-world belief and additional research. Hypothesized dimensions of just-world beliefs include belief in an unjust world, beliefs in immanent justice and ultimate justice, hope for justice, and belief in one's ability to reduce injustice. Other work has focused on looking at the different domains in which the belief may function; individuals may have different just-world beliefs for the personal domain, the sociopolitical domain, the social domain, etc. An especially fruitful distinction is between the belief in a just world for the self (personal) and the belief in a just world for others (general). These distinct beliefs are differentially associated with positive mental health.

Correlates

Researchers have used measures of belief in a just world to look at correlates of high and low levels of belief in a just world.

Limited studies have examined ideological correlates of the belief in a just world. These studies have found sociopolitical correlates of just-world beliefs, including right-wing authoritarianism and the Protestant work ethic. Studies have also found belief in a just world to be correlated with aspects of religiousness.

Studies of demographic differences, including gender and racial differences, have not shown systemic differences, but do suggest racial differences, with blacks and African Americans having the lowest levels of belief in a just world.

The development of measures of just-world beliefs has also allowed researchers to assess cross-cultural differences in just-world beliefs. Much research conducted shows that beliefs in a just world are evident cross-culturally. One study tested beliefs in a just world of students in 12 countries. This study found that in countries where the majority of inhabitants are powerless, belief in a just world tends to be weaker than in other countries. This supports the theory of the just-world hypothesis because the powerless have had more personal and societal experiences that provided evidence that the world is not just and predictable.

Belief in unjust world has been linked to increased self-handicapping, criminality, defensive coping, anger and perceived future risk. It may also serve as ego-protective belief for certain individuals by justifying maladaptive behavior.

Current research

Positive mental health effects

Although much of the initial work on belief in a just world focused on its negative social effects, other research suggests that belief in a just world is good, and even necessary, for mental health. Belief in a just world is associated with greater life satisfaction and well-being and less depressive affect. Researchers are actively exploring the reasons why the belief in a just world might have this relationship to mental health; it has been suggested that such beliefs could be a personal resource or coping strategy that buffers stress associated with daily life and with traumatic events. This hypothesis suggests that belief in a just world can be understood as a positive illusion. In line with this perspective, recent research also suggests that belief in a just world may explain the known statistical association between religiosity/spirituality and psychological well-being 

Some studies also show that beliefs in a just world are correlated with internal locus of control. Strong belief in a just world is associated with greater acceptance of and less dissatisfaction with negative events in one's life. This may be one way in which belief in a just world affects mental health. Others have suggested that this relationship holds only for beliefs in a just world for oneself. Beliefs in a just world for others are related instead to the negative social phenomena of victim blaming and victim derogation observed in other studies.

International research

More than 40 years after Lerner's seminal work on belief in a just world, researchers continue to study the phenomenon. Work continues primarily in the United States, Europe, Australia, and Asia. Researchers in Germany have contributed disproportionately to recent research. Their work resulted in a volume edited by Lerner and German researcher Leo Montada titled Responses to Victimizations and Belief in a Just World (1998).