Previous research showed justice sensitivity – the tendency to perceive and negatively respond to injustice as a victim, observer, or perpetrator – to be reliably and validly measurable in middle childhood, but unexpected findings concerning mean values and measurement invariance require replication, and retest reliabilities, longitudinal relations with prosocial and aggressive behavior, and relations with teacher ratings are currently unknown. This study, therefore, examined mean values, factor structure, retest reliabilities, and MI of self- and parent-rated JS as well as their (...) relations with parent- and teacher-rated prosocial and aggressive behavior and a range of social skills in a sample of 1,329 children between 5 and 12 years of age. Using self- and parent ratings, we could replicate the intended factor structure of three related yet distinct JS subscales. We found strong MI between those ratings. Retest reliabilities of parent ratings were similar to older age groups, but lower for self-ratings. All JS perspectives were positively related with theory of mind and empathy, indicating a good understanding of others’ internal states. Victim JS was negatively related to affective and behavioral self-regulation, whereas observer and perpetrator JS showed positive relations. Victim JS negatively and observer and perpetrator JS positively predicted prosocial behavior. The opposite pattern was found regarding aggressive behavior. This study provides additional support that JS can be measured via self- and other reports in childhood and that it may influence behavior early on. It adds to explaining the relations with prosocial and aggressive behavior. (shrink)

Anger, indignation, guilt, rumination, victim compensation, and perpetrator punishment are considered primary responses associated with justice sensitivity. However, injustice and high JS may predispose to further responses. We had N = 293 adults rate their JS, 17 potential responses toward 12 unjust scenarios from the victim’s, observer’s, beneficiary’s, and perpetrator’s perspectives, and several control variables. Unjust situations generally elicited many affective, cognitive, and behavioral responses. JS generally predisposed to strong affective responses toward injustice, including sadness, pity, disappointment, and helplessness. It (...) impaired trivialization, victim-blaming, or justification, which may otherwise help cope with injustice. It predisposed to conflict solutions and victim compensation. Particularly victim and beneficiary JS had stronger effects in unjust situations from the corresponding perspective. These findings add to a better understanding of the main and interaction effects of unjust situations from different perspectives and the JS facets, differences between the JS facets, as well as the links between JS and behavior and well-being. (shrink)