1. Entitlement and Values Motivate Beliefs about Justice
Hi I’m liz redford, I’m a social grad student at UF.
Liz Redford, Kate Ratliff
University of Florida

2. Do values mediate between entitlement and justice beliefs?
Prioritize
self-enhancing values
Justice
beliefs
Today we’ll review two studies that test whether entitlement influences three beliefs about justice.
The justice beliefs we’ll look at are perceptions that crime threatens hierarchies, endorsement of status and power restoration as a purpose of punishment, and preferences that punishment comes in the form of retributive revenge.
And we’ll see whether the influence of entitlement on justice beliefs is mediated by how much people prioritize self-enhancing values.
The main idea is that entitled people are more likely to value enhancing the self—basically, maintaining power and status. These values might manifest in their justice beliefs, or their ideas about how to treat norm violators who they perceived to threaten social hierarchies.
So I’ll explain our measures of each of these variables before describing the two studies. First, let’s talk about entitlement.

3. Entitlement
Pervasive, maladaptive sense that one deserves more than others (α = .82)
Psychological Entitlement Scale
I honestly feel I’m just more deserving than others
Exploitive Entitlement Scale
I am willing to admit that I feel I am due more in life than other people
Entitlement is a pervasive, maladaptive sense that one deserves more than others, often at others’ expense.
We measured entitlement by combining items from two scales.
The psychological entitlement scale has items like I honestly feel I’m just more deserving than others.
The exploitive entitlement scale has items like I am willing to admit that I feel I am due more in life than other people.

4. self-enhancing values
Entitlement
Prioritize
self-enhancing values
Justice
beliefs
Now let’s define our mediator variable, prioritization of self-enhancing values.

5. Prioritization of self-enhancing values
Self-enhancing values: Power and achievement (α = .79)
Self-transcending values: Universalism (α = .68)
Prioritization of self-enhancing values =
Power & achievement minus Universalism
to capture self-enhancing values, asked people how much they value power and achievement, as specified by schwartz’ value theory and data.
And we measured self-transcending values via the value of universalism, which is about social justice and others’ welfare.
We subtracted universalism from power and achievement values to create a prioritization
So basically, this is how much they value power and achievement over universalism. So a 0 means that power and achievement are equally valued as universalism, and a positive number means that power and achievement are valued more than , or prioritized over, universalism.

6. self-enhancing values
Entitlement
Prioritize
self-enhancing values
Justice
beliefs
Now let’s define our three justice beliefs, which are the outcome variables.

7. Justice Beliefs Crime as hierarchy threat (α = .79)
perceive crime to threaten power/status hierarchies
By committing crime, criminal offenders try to communicate that they are superior to the rest of society.
Power/status restoration motive (α = .80)
power/status restoration as a symbolic motive of punishment
Punishment should humiliate the offender.
Retributive justice orientation (α = .84)
endorse punishment in the form of retributive revenge
Society should punish to get back at criminal offenders
The first is crime as hierarchy threat. people who score high on this measure perceive criminals to subvert power and status hierarchies in society.
The second is power/status restoration motive. High scorers here endorse restoring status and power as a purpose of punishment.
The third was retributive justice orientation. High scorers prefer that punishment comes in the form of retributive revenge.
So together, these measures are capturing the belief that criminals usurp status/power by breaking laws, that punishment should restore that imbalance of power and status, and that it can do so by taking the form of retributive revenge.

8. Study 1: Do values mediate between entitlement and justice beliefs?
Prioritize
self-enhancing values
Justice
beliefs
Study 1 tested the hypotheses that prioritization of self-enhancing values mediates the effect of entitlement on each of three justice beliefs. We’ll test each of the three justice beliefs separately.

9. Self-enhancing values Self-transcending values
Procedure
N = 568
Age: M  = years
65.3% women
69.4% White
Self-enhancing values
Power; Achievement
Self-transcending values
Universalism
Crime as hierarchy threat
Power/status restoration motive
Retributive justice orientation
Entitlement
We collected data from 568 volunteers online.
They completed the entitlement scales, the measures of personal values, and lastly the three measures of justice beliefs.

10. Results: Crime as hierarchy threat
Indirect effect: b = .12 (.08, .18)
b = .42, p < .001
Crime as
hierarchy
threat
Entitlement
With mediator in model:
b = .30, p < .001
First, let’s look at crime as hierarchy threat.
Entitlement predicts perceptions that crime threatens hierarchies
Entitlement also predicts values, which in turn predict crime threat perceptions.
Entering values into the model, the influence of entitlement on crime threat is weaker but still significant.
The indirect effect is also significant, so values partially mediate the entitlement—crime threat relationship.
And remember, prioritizing self enhancing values is about valuing power and achievement over universalism. So people who feel entitled see crime as a hierarchy threat because criminals seem to be powerful and free to behave as they wish, and they’re concerned that such crime upsets the balance of power and status in society.
b = .27
p < .001
b = .45
p < .001
Prioritize
self-enhancing values

11. Results: Power/status restoration motive
Indirect effect: b = .12 (.07, .18)
b = .57, p < .001
Power/status
motive
Entitlement
With mediator in model:
b = .45, p < .001
Now endorsement of power and status restoration as a punishment goal.
Entitlement predicts perceptions that restoring status and power should be a goal of punishment,
Entitlement also predicts values, which in turn predict power and status restoration.
Entering values into the model, the influence of entitlement on power restoration is weaker but still significant.
The indirect effect is also significant, so values partially mediate the entitlement—restoration threat relationship.
So people who feel entitled want punishment to restore the balance of power because they value power and achievement. So to them, it’s important that punishment degrades and reduces the power of offenders, thereby restoring the balance of power that was upset by the offense.
b = .27
p < .001
b = .44
p < .001
Prioritize
self-enhancing values

12. Results: Retributive justice orientation
Indirect effect: b = .13 (.08, .19)
Retributive
justice
orientation
b = .31, p < .001
Entitlement
With mediator in model:
b = .18, p = .005
Now endorsement of retributive revenge as central to punishment.
Entitlement predicts support of retributive, vengeful punishment,
Entitlement also predicts values, which in turn predict retribution.
Entering values into the model, the influence of entitlement on retribution is weaker but still significant.
The indirect effect is also significant, so values partially mediate the entitlement—retribution relationship.
So people who feel entitled want retributive punishment because they value power and achievement. So to them, it’s important to get back at offenders, to repay them in kind, which should restore the balance of power that was upset by the offense.
So as expected, prioritization of self-enhancing values partially mediates between entitlement and each of the three justice beliefs. People who feel entitled to more than others value power and achievement more, which in turn contributes to their seeing crime as a power- and hierarchy-based transaction.
b = .27
p < .001
b = .49
p < .001
Prioritize
self-enhancing values

13. Self-enhancing values Self-transcending values
Study 2: Procedure
N = 160
Age: M  = years
64.4% women
71.3% White
Crime as hierarchy threat
Power/status restoration motive
Retributive justice orientation
Self-enhancing values
Power; Achievement
Self-transcending values
Universalism
Entitlement manipulation
In Study 2, we /manipulated/ entitlement . We asked volunteers to list one reason for each of three statements.
people the entitlement condition reported why they (1) should demand the best in life, why they (2) deserve more than others, and why they (3) should get their way in life.
In the control condition, they reported why they (1) should /not/ demand the best in life, why they (2) do /not/deserve more than others, and why they (3) should /not/ expect to get their own way.
Then everyone completed measures of values, and then the measures of justice beliefs in randomized order.
And data collection ongoing for this study. With total sample size at 160, we’re at .30 power for the A path of the mediation, and .80 power is a better target.

14. Results: Crime as hierarchy threat
Indirect effect: b = .05 (-.004, .19)
b = .38, p = .09
Crime as
hierarchy
threat
Entitlement
With mediator in model:
b = .32, p = .15
b = .18
p = .17
Like in the last study, we ran three mediator models, one for each justice belief.
Let’s start with perceptions that crime threatens hierarchies.
Entitlement doesn’t influence perceptions that crime threatens hierarchies. Nor does it influence values.
But values /do/ influence perceptions that crime threatens hierarchies, like we expected.
But the indirect effect of values is not quite significant.
b = .30
p = .02
Prioritize
self-enhancing values

15. Results: Power/status restoration motive
Indirect effect: b = .08 (-.01, .25)
b = .79, p < .001
Power/status
motive
Entitlement
With mediator in model:
b = .71, p = .002
b = .18
p = .17
Now endorsement of power and status restoration as a punishment goal.
Entitlement influences power and status restoration.
And values also influence power and status restoration, like we expected.
With values in the model, the effect of entitlement on power and status restoration is slightly smaller, but still significant.
And again the indirect effect of values is not quite significant.
b = .43
p = .002
Prioritize
self-enhancing values

16. Results: Retributive justice orientation
Indirect effect: b = .10 (-.02, .29)
Retributive
justice
orientation
b = .53, p = .02
Entitlement
With mediator in model:
b = .43, p = .048
b = .18
p = .17
Now endorsement of retributive revenge.
Entitlement influences retribution.
And values also influence retribution, like we expected.
With values in the model, the effect of entitlement on retribution is slightly smaller, but still significant.
And again the indirect effect of values is not quite significant.
So in all three models, each justice belief was influenced by entitlement and values. However, values don’t seem to explain /why/ entitlement influences justice beliefs, although we’ll see what happens when an improved sample size narrows these confidence intervals.
b = .57
p < .001
Prioritize
self-enhancing values

17. Justice Entitlement beliefs
Prioritize
self-enhancing values
Justice
beliefs
Crime threatens hierarchies Power/status restoration
Retributive punishment
So based on the first study, entitled people are more likely to value enhancing the self—basically, maintaining power and status. These values manifest in their justice beliefs, or their ideas about how to treat norm violators.
And in the second study, entitlement caused changes injustice beliefs: entitled people became more likely to perceive that criminals usurp status/power by breaking laws, that punishment should restore that imbalance of power and status, and that it can do so by taking the form of retributive revenge.
In short, people who feel entitled to more than others value power and achievement more, which in turn contributes to their seeing crime as a power- and hierarchy-based transaction.

18. Acknowledgments
Funding: Project Implicit Misc. feedback: ASC lab at UF
Thanks to my collaborators and to you for your time.

19. Study 1

20. Study 2

21. Study 2 power analysis for entitlement  values path