Organizational and social justice paradoxes in EDI

This perspective article positions social justice as an addition to the aims of organizational justice, and core to diversity, equality, and inclusion (DEI). It problematizes simplistic DEI rhetoric and positions paradoxes within DEI, as experienced by employers, based on an explanation of key justice concepts and the introduction of fairness, equality, desert, and need. The paper broadens perspective-taking beyond a sole focus on beneficiaries of DEI, towards tensions that employers experience in working towards the aims of workplace justice, including the embeddedness of social justice within both organizations and social systems. The paper concludes with avenues for future research and a call to carefully examine simplistic notions of organizational justice in effecting DEI, suggesting a paradoxical lens on embracing, rather than avoiding, multiple and often conflicting workplace justice imperatives.

The "Partial Innocence" Effect: False Guilty Pleas to Partially Unethical Behaviors

Although research has focused on the "innocence problem," "partial innocence" may also plague individuals who plead guilty to crimes they did not commit, but that are either comparable, more severe, or less severe than their actual crimes. Using a high-stake experimental paradigm and an immersive role-playing paradigm, we examined the psychology of partial innocence. Students were randomly induced (or imagined themselves) to be innocent, guilty, or partially innocent of committing an academic transgression and then given the choice to accept or reject a deal to avoid disciplinary sanction. Across three studies (Ns = 88, 75, 746), partially innocent students pled to cheating nearly as often as guilty students and vastly more often than innocent students. Partially innocent students-not unlike guilty students-experienced greater feelings of guilt than did innocent students. In turn, these feelings of guilt, but not shame, were associated with taking responsibility for a range of transgressions not committed.

"Initially, medicines will be given, and then we need to study the case": Medicalized perspectives about chronicity and mental health care in Kerala

In response to the global call to upscale mental health services in low--income countries, mental health non-governmental organisations (MHNGOs) have sprung up in Kerala to address mental health needs by partnering with pre-existing locally grown, bottom-up, community-led pain and palliative clinics (PPCs) to increase access to mental health care through task-shifting. The MHNGOs mandate filtering only patients with 'severe mental disorders' from low socioeconomic backgrounds for their free services. This eligibility criterion mandated by the MHNGO is ruffling feathers within the palliative clinics that oppose such -classifications. They believe that suffering cuts across all divisions and should not be discriminated against based on economic background and severity of illnesses. When chronicity and suffering are held universal by the MHNGO and palliative care, respectively, it brings to the fore the enactment of two perspectives of care. Drawing on observations of clinical interactions between patients, MHNGO staff and mental health professionals and interviews with community volunteers of palliative care clinics in Kerala, this paper demonstrates how chronicity narrative promoted by MHNGOs based on biopsychiatric model gains hegemony, whereas the community care model loses traction progressively. The state, caught between these two narratives, frontstages development by submitting its health machinery to the MHNGOs flouting basic medical safety laws in its services to marginalised people like the tribal population. This paper argues that the rising dominance of chronicity narrative in community mental health clinics as well as in popular media discourses evolves out of power relations between the MHNGOs and the palliative clinics.

Citizenship deservingness justifies exclusive national boundary making: A socio-dynamic mixed-methods approach to social representations of citizenship

Naturalization policies prescribe the conditions immigrants must fulfil to be legally recognized as national citizens in a receiving country. When changes in naturalization policies are publicly debated, divergent opinions on national boundary making reveal social representations of citizenship as spaces of political contention. This research offers a socio-dynamic analysis of citizenship representations in the context of a recent referendum on a simplified naturalization procedure for third-generation immigrants in Switzerland. Automatic lexicometric techniques enriched with reflexive thematic analysis were performed on a post-vote survey (VOTO, N = 998), to examine how voters grounded their voting decisions via different citizenship representations. The results showed that ascribed criteria based on natural birthrights and cultural assimilation were mobilized in favour of more permissive access to nationality. Conversely, allegedly achievable criteria based on citizenship deservingness were mobilized against. These findings provide new evidence about citizenship deservingness as a neoliberal strategy legitimizing exclusive national boundary making.

Is this crisis different? Attitudes towards EU fiscal transfers in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic

To mitigate the enormous and asymmetric economic implications of the COVID-19 pandemic, the EU has adopted an unprecedented €750 billion fiscal transfer programme, financed by joint member state liabilities. The highly contested decision pitted 'frugal' northern member states against 'profligate' southern member states. However, do citizens from northern countries view EU transfers as unfavourably as their governmental positions suggest? This article focuses on the crucial case of the Netherlands, whose government has become the assertive leader of the 'frugal' coalition. We test COVID-19 specific explanations based on a large-scale survey conducted at the height of the pandemic. Our analysis suggests that citizens who experience the non-material health and social effects of the pandemic more directly are more supportive of fiscal transfers than those to whom the pandemic is more abstract, whereas those who experience negative financial effects and those who believe that COVID-19 is a conspiracy are less supportive.

Sometimes needs change minds: Interests and values as determinants of attitudes towards state support for the self-employed during the COVID-19 crisis

This contribution investigates public attitudes toward providing financial help to the self-employed, a less well-researched area in the otherwise vibrant literature on welfare state attitudes. We analyse to what extent the self-employed themselves soften their general anti-statist stance in times of need, and how the public thinks about supporting those who usually tend to oppose government interventions. To answer these questions, we study public attitudes towards providing financial aid to the self-employed during the lockdowns adopted in response to the COVID pandemic in Switzerland, using survey data collected in the spring and in the autumn of 2020. The results show that most respondents favour the provision of financial support. In addition, the self-employed are the staunchest supporters of the more generous forms of help, like non-refundable payments. We conclude that, when exposed to significant economic risk, need and interests override ideological preferences for less state intervention.

Unemployed + Sick = More Deserving? A Survey Experiment on How the Medicalization of Unemployment Affects Public Opinion

The literature on the social legitimacy of welfare benefits has shown that sick persons are perceived more deserving than unemployed individuals. However, these studies examine sick and unemployed persons as distinct groups, while unemployment and sickness are in fact strongly related. Policymakers across Europe have been increasingly concerned with discouraging a medicalization of unemployment and activating sick unemployed persons. Therefore, it is crucial to understand welfare attitudes toward this group. Using a factorial survey fielded with a representative sample of German-speaking adults (N=2,621), we investigate how sickness affects attitudes toward a hypothetical unemployed person on three dimensions: benefit levels, conditions, and sanctions. Respondents allocated similar benefit levels to unemployed persons regardless of whether they have an illness. Yet, they were more hesitant to apply existing conditions (e.g., active job search, job training) or sanction benefits when the unemployed person was also sick. This is except for conditions that tie benefits to obligatory health services (back training or psychological counseling) which was supported by the majority of respondents. Our research shows that the German public is not more generous and only partially more lenient toward sick unemployed persons as there is strong support for conditions targeted at overcoming ill health for this group. The findings underscore that sickness matters for how unemployed persons are perceived, but the impact varies across different dimensions of welfare attitudes.

Moral Dilemmas in Hospitals: Which Shooting Victim Should Be Saved?

Moral judgments can occur either in settings that call for impartiality or in settings that allow for partiality. How effective are impartiality settings such as hospitals in suppressing personal biases? Portrayed as decision-makers in an emergency department, 431 college students made judgments on which of two victims of a mass shooting should receive immediate, life-saving care. Patients differed in ways that could reveal biases, e.g., age (8 vs. 80 years), kinship (stranger vs. cousin), gender (female vs. male), and villain/hero (shooter vs. policeman who stopped him). Participants rated each patient’s moral deservingness to receive immediate care and the likelihood they would choose the patient. Both scales showed young favored over old, cousin (or daughter) over stranger, and policeman over shooter (largest difference). In a hospital-room scenario with high risk of injury from falling, age bias disappeared. With moderate fall risk, age bias reversed and kinship deservingness bias disappeared. Bias decreases when there is a decrease in severity of potential harm to the preferred stakeholder. Settings that call for impartiality are not reliable “boundary conditions” against expressions of bias. In the absence of explicit guidelines for allocating scarce resources, a systematic, objective method of random selection offers a potentially useful strategy.

The Relation Between Belief in a Just World and Early Processing of Deserved and Undeserved Outcomes: An ERP Study

We used event-related potentials (ERPs) to examine how quickly people in general, and certain people in particular, process deservingness-relevant information. Female university students completed individual difference measures, including individual differences in the belief in a just world (BJW), a belief that people get what they deserve. They then read stories in which an outcome was deserved, undeserved, or neither deserved nor undeserved (i.e., "neutral") while their ERPs were recorded with scalp electrodes. We found no overall differentiation between early ERP responses (< 300 ms post stimulus onset) to deserved, undeserved, and neutral outcomes. However, BJW correlated with the difference between early ERP responses to these forms of information (rs from |.44| to |.61|; ps from .018 to < .001). The early nature of our effects (e.g., 96 ms after stimulus onset) suggests individual differences in socially-relevant information processing that begins before conscious evaluation of the stimuli. Potential underlying processes include automatic attention to schema-relevant information and to unexpected (and therefore salient) information and automatic processing of belief-consistent information. Our research underscores the importance of the concept of deservingness in human information processing as well as the utility of ERP technology and robust statistical analyses in investigations of complex social stimuli.

All in This Together? A Preregistered Report on Deservingness of Government Aid During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has placed unprecedented pressure on governments to engage in widespread cash transfers directly to citizens to help mitigate economic losses. Major and near-universal redistribution efforts have been deployed, but there is remarkably little understanding of where the mass public believes financial support is warranted. Using experimental evidence, we evaluate whether considerations related to deservingness, similarity, and prejudicial attitudes structure support for these transfers. A preregistered experiment found broad, generous, and nondiscriminatory support for direct cash transfers related to COVID-19 in Canada. The second study, accepted as a preregistered report, further probes these dynamics by comparing COVID-19-related outlays with nonemergency ones. We find that COVID-19-related spending was more universal as compared to a more generic cash allocation program. Given that the results were driven by the income of hypothetical recipients, we find broad support for disaster relief that is not means-tested or otherwise constrained by pre-disaster income.

Disabled but not deserving? The perceived deservingness of disability welfare benefit claimants

While disability benefits make up the largest group of claimants in high-income countries, we know surprisingly little about which disabled people are seen as 'deserving' benefits, nor whether different people in different countries judge deservingness-related characteristics similarly. This is surprising given they are increasingly the focus of retrenchment, which often affirms the deservingness of 'truly deserving' disabled people while focusing cuts and demands on those 'less deserving'. This article addresses this gap using two vignette-based factorial survey experiments: (i) the nine-country 'Stigma in Global Context - Mental Health Study' (SGC-MHS); (ii) a new YouGov survey in Norway/the UK, together with UK replication. I find a hierarchy of symptoms/impairments, from wheelchair use (perceived as most deserving), to schizophrenia and back pain, fibromyalgia, depression and finally asthma (least deserving). Direct manipulations of deservingness-related characteristics also influence judgements, including membership of ethnic/racial ingroups and particularly blameworthiness and medical legitimation. In contrast, the effects of work ability, age and work history are relatively weak, particularly when compared to the effects on unemployed claimants. Finally, for non-disabled unemployed claimants, I confirm previous findings that right-wingers respond more strongly to deservingness-related characteristics, but Norwegians and Britons respond similarly. For disabled claimants, however, the existing picture is challenged, with, for example, Britons responding more strongly to these characteristics than Norwegians. I conclude by drawing together the implications for policy, particularly the politics of disability benefits, the role of medical legitimation and the legitimacy challenges of the increasing role of mental health in disability benefit recipiency.

Familial Vulnerability: Legal Status and Mental Health within Mixed-Status Families

Mental and emotional well-being are intimately entangled with immigration status, personal relationships, and the broader political environment. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork in South Texas including interviews with mixed-status families, this article illustrates the spillover impacts affecting mental and emotional health of family members with different legal statuses. Building on the notion of "structural vulnerability," we propose the concept of familial vulnerability, a lens which highlights how racialization, legal status, and discrimination affect the family unit. Our analysis of the mental health impacts on family members within mixed-status families may inform necessary changes to programs and policies to improve the needs of this population.

The Role of Subjective and Objective Social Status in the Generation of Envy

Envy is a negative emotion experienced in response to another person’s higher status. However, little is known about the composition of its most important element: status. The present research investigates the two main forms of social status (objective and subjective) in the generation of envy. In Study 1, participants recounted real-life situations when they felt envious; in Study 2 we examined whether the effect was the same in a controlled situation. We consistently found that those who were the most respected in the eyes of others were envied more than the richest ones. Furthermore, perceived deservingness of the superior other’s success differentiated between benign and malicious envy. Although previous studies focused on material comparisons when investigating envy, our results indicate that envy is rather a subjective social status related emotion. Not material, but social advantage of the superior other causes the most painful envy and future studies should put more emphasis on this type of social comparison in envy research.

The Roles of Disliking, Deservingness, and Envy in Predicting Schadenfreude

Schadenfreude (pleasure about another's misfortune) was studied using written scenarios that were manipulated to include elements that elicited disliking of the target, envy of the target, and/or deservingness of the misfortune. This was the first time all the three predictors were included in a single study, allowing for a test of their possible interactive effects. Study 1 created a large pool of scenarios based on a pilot study and had participants rate them regarding how much disliking, deservingness, or envy was felt. The eight scenarios that were most effective in eliciting the various combinations of predictors were then used in Study 2 to test for schadenfreude reactions. Results revealed strong main effects for disliking and deservingness. Interactions showed that disliking attenuated the effect of deservingness, especially for female participants. Finally, further evidence was found that malicious but not benign envy predicted schadenfreude.

The economy of smiles: affect, labour and the contemporary deserving poor

This paper examines the affective dimensions of new forms of informal entrepreneurial work carried out in spaces of unemployment. Situating the analysis within contemporary scholarship on deservingness and on affect and labour, I shed light on the forms of entrepreneurial labour that rely upon affect-driven economies of exchange underpinned by moral judgements of deservingness, value and worth. In particular, this paper draws on a multi-city (Melbourne, London, San Francisco) study of homeless street press sellers (The Big Issue and Street Sheet) to explore the ways in which contemporary practices of charity and care are carried out through individualized market-place exchanges. Sellers' accounts of their work reveal how smiling and being (or looking) happy is a performative expectation that must be managed in the face of poverty and precarity.

Deserving citizenship? Exploring migrants' experiences of the 'citizenship test' process in the United Kingdom

Since the early 2000s several European countries have introduced language and citizenship tests as new requirements for access to long-term residence or naturalization. The content of citizenship tests has been often presented as exclusionary in nature, in particular as it is based on the idea that access to citizenship has to be 'deserved'. In this paper, we aim to explore the citizenship tests 'from below', through the focus on the experience of migrants who prepare and take the 'Life in the UK' test, and with particular reference to how they relate to the idea of 'deservingness'. Through a set of in-depth interviews with migrants in two different cities (Leicester and London), we show that many of them use narratives in which they distinguish between the 'deserving citizens' and the 'undeserving Others' when they reflect upon their experience of becoming citizens. In so doing, they negotiate new hierarchies of inclusion into and exclusion from citizenship, which reflect broader neo-liberal and ethos-based conceptions of citizenship.

Are the Undocumented Deserving? Health Workers' Views of Immigrants in Alabama

Undocumented immigrants are ineligible for many public benefits and often rely on safety-net clinics, such as community health centers, for health care. Using in-depth interviews, we explored attitudes about undocumented immigrants' deservingness of health care among staff and professional health workers (n=31) at two safety-net clinics in Alabama, which passed a restrictive immigration law in 2011. We used content analysis to examine frequently used frames to describe health deservingness. Overall, a total of 27 frames were used by health workers. They most frequently justified their views using frames of medical humanitarianism (i.e., health workers should care for those in need) and equality (i.e., people should not be treated differently from one another). Several respondents used multiple, conflicting frames that simultaneously supported and questioned immigrants' deservingness of care. The diverse ways in which health workers in this sample framed undocumented immigrants' health deservingness may affect provider-patient interactions.

Undeserving, Disadvantaged, Disregarded: Three Viewpoints of Charity Food Aid Recipients in Finland

Since the economic recession of the 1990s, Finland has experienced the proliferation of charity food aid as a means of helping people who are afflicted by poverty. However, so far little research has been conducted regarding the food aid recipients. This article gives discursive, demographic, and experiential insights into charity food provision and reception in Finland. Drawing on quantitative survey data, online discussion data related to news published on Finnish newspapers’ web pages, and observation and interviews with food aid recipients, this article sheds new light on Finnish food aid recipients from three perspectives. First, public perceptions about food aid often portray food recipients as dishonourable and responsible for their own poverty. Secondly, the survey data shows that the main reason for people resorting to charity food aid is deep economic disadvantage, and further, that there is an unequal accumulation of disadvantage among the food aid recipients, illustrating internal diversity. Third, observational and interview data show that from the food recipients’ perspective, the food aid system has only a limited ability to answer even their immediate food needs, and for the recipients, food aid venues can become not only socially significant, but also socially demanding and emotionally burdening places.

Creating Undocumented EU Migrants through Welfare: A Conceptualization of Undeserving and Precarious Citizenship

Following the financial and economic crisis, welfare policies across the EU are increasingly becoming instruments for limiting the mobility of certain EU migrants. In this article, we focus on EU citizens who see their freedom of movement in the EU being restricted after they have applied for social assistance or unemployment benefits in their country of residence. Doing so, we conceptualize undocumented EU migration by means of the concepts of 'non-deportability', 'deservingness' and 'precariousness'. Overall, this article - based on ethnographic fieldwork conducted with Italian migrants in Belgium - expands our understanding of undocumented migration by demonstrating how arbitrary and intimidating bureaucratic processes undermine the exercise of EU citizenship.

'The deserving': Moral reasoning and ideological dilemmas in public responses to humanitarian communications

This study investigates everyday moral reasoning in relation to donations and prosocial behaviour in a humanitarian context. The discursive analysis focuses on the principles of deservingness which members of the public use to decide who to help and under what conditions. The study discusses three repertoires of deservingness - 'seeing a difference', 'waiting in queues', and 'something for nothing' - to illustrate participants' dilemmatic reasoning and to examine how the position of 'being deserving' is negotiated in humanitarian crises. Discursive analyses of these dilemmatic repertoires of deservingness identify the cultural and ideological resources behind these constructions and show how humanitarianism intersects and clashes with other ideologies and value systems. The data suggest that a neoliberal ideology, which endorses self-gratification, materialistic and individualistic ethics, and cultural assimilation of helper and receiver play important roles in decisions about humanitarian helping. The study argues for the need for psychological research to engage more actively with the dilemmas involved in the moral reasoning related to humanitarianism and to contextualize decisions about giving and helping within the sociocultural and ideological landscape in which the helper operates.

Eating and Feeding at the Margins of the State: Barriers to Health Care for Undocumented Migrant Women and the "Clinical" Aspects of Food Assistance

In this article, I examine the various meanings of Mexican and Central American migrant women's utilization of private food assistance programs. I present findings from 20 months of ethnographic fieldwork conducted between 2008 and 2011 with migrant women, public health workers, and staff and volunteers of food assistance programs in Santa Barbara County, California. I discuss the barriers undocumented women face in accessing formal health care and the social and moral obligations that underpin these women's role in feeding others. I also document the ways in which private food assistance programs are orienting toward a focus on health in service delivery, and how women depend on provisions from these programs to support feeding practices at home. I argue that these findings are significant for current engagement by critical medical anthropologists in studying framings of "the clinic" and cultural beliefs about "deservingness."

Making sense of misfortune: deservingness, self-esteem, and patterns of self-defeat

Drawing on theorizing and research suggesting that people are motivated to view their world as an orderly and predictable place in which people get what they deserve, the authors proposed that (a) random and uncontrollable bad outcomes will lower self-esteem and (b) this, in turn, will lead to the adoption of self-defeating beliefs and behaviors. Four experiments demonstrated that participants who experienced or recalled bad (vs. good) breaks devalued their self-esteem (Studies 1a and 1b), and that decrements in self-esteem (whether arrived at through misfortune or failure experience) increase beliefs about deserving bad outcomes (Studies 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b). Five studies (Studies 3-7) extended these findings by showing that this, in turn, can engender a wide array of self-defeating beliefs and behaviors, including claimed self-handicapping ahead of an ability test (Study 3), the preference for others to view the self less favorably (Studies 4-5), chronic self-handicapping and thoughts of physical self-harm (Study 6), and choosing to receive negative feedback during an ability test (Study 7). The current findings highlight the important role that concerns about deservingness play in the link between lower self-esteem and patterns of self-defeating beliefs and behaviors. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

Popular Criteria for the Welfare Deservingness of Disability Pensioners: The Influence of Structural and Cultural Factors

Research has shown that several criteria underlie people's opinions about the welfare deservingness of benefit recipients. However, it remains unknown which factors are associated with the emphasis that people place on such criteria. Using a 2006 Dutch national survey on the welfare deservingness of disability pension recipients, we study the influence of structural and cultural factors on people's emphasis on three deservingness criteria: control, need, and reciprocity. OLS regression analyses show that people's emphasis on specific deservingness criteria is strengthened by structural factors that indicate the possibility of resource competition such as the following: age, lower levels of education, unemployment, and lower income. However, actual personal experience with receiving welfare benefits weakens criteria emphasis. Cultural factors such as the espousal of views from the political right and the possession of a strong work ethic are associated with a heightened emphasis on deservingness criteria.