Psychology, Interamerican
The Role of Justice in the Relationship of Sexism and Violence Against Women
PDF (Português (Brasil))


Scope of justice, sexism, violence, justified discrimination.

How to Cite

Tomaz Paiva, T., & Pereira, C. R. (2021). The Role of Justice in the Relationship of Sexism and Violence Against Women. Revista Interamericana De Psicología/Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 55(3), e1591.


The application of the principles of justice is restricted in romantic relationships, contributing to the acceptance of violence against women. The objective was to analyze whether the perception of university students about the scope of justice will be the element that justifies the acceptance of violence against women. 305 university students participated. The results showed that the most sexist people, who also believe that the world is a fair place, are the ones that restrict the scope of justice application the most, that is, they perceive marriage as being excluded from that scope. Therefore, this study adds important data in studies on the role of the social context in legitimizing social inequalities.
PDF (Português (Brasil))


Brickman, P., Rabinowitz, V. C., Karuza, J., Coates, D., Cohen, E., & Kidder, L. (1982). Models of helping and coping. American Psychologist, 37, 368-384.

Burgess, D., & Borgida, E. (1999). Who women are, who women should be: descriptive and prescriptive gender stereotyping in sex discrimination. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5(3), 665-692.

Correia, I., (2010). Psicologia social da justiça: fundamentos e desenvolvimentos teóricos e empíricos. Análise Psicológica, 1 (XXVIII), 7-28.

Correia, I., Pereira, C. R., & Vala, J. (2018). Under victimization by an outgroup: belief in a just world, national identification, and ingroup blame. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(1160), 1-11.

Correia I., Alves H., Morais R., Ramos M. (2015). The legitimation of wife abuse among women: the impact of belief in a just world and gender identification. Personality and Individual Differences, 76, 7-12.

Correia, I., & Vala, J., (2003). Crença no mundo justo e vitimização secundária: o papel moderador da inocência da vítima e da persistência do sofrimento. Análise Psicológica, 3 (XXI), 341-352.

Crandall, C. S., & Eshleman, A. (2003). A justification suppression model of the expression and experience of prejudice. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 414-446.

Dalbert, C.; Montada, L. & Schmitt, M. (1987). Glaube an eine gerechte welt als motiv: validierungskorrelate zweier skalen. Psychologische Beitrage, 29, 596–615.

De Judicibus, M., & McCabe, M. P. (2001). Blaming the target of sexual harassment: Impact of gender role, sexist attitudes, and work role. Sex Roles, 44(7/8), 401-417.

Devine, P. G. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 5-18.

Feldman-Summers, S., & Palmer, G. C. (1980). Rape as viewed by judges, prosecutors, and police officers. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 7, 19-40.

Formiga, N. S., Gouveia, V. V. & Santos, M. N. (2002). Inventário de sexismo ambivalente: sua adaptação e relação com o gênero. Revista Psicologia em Estudo, 7(1),105- 111.

Gracia, E., García, F., & Lila, M. (2011). Police attitudes toward policing partner violence against women: Do they correspond to different psychosocial profiles? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26, 189-207.

Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512.

Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109-118.

Glick, P., Sakallı-Uğurlu, N., Akbaş, G., Orta, İ. M., Ceylan, S. (2015). Why do women endorse honor beliefs? Ambivalent sexism and religiosity as predictors. Sex Roles, 75(11), 543–554.

Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression based approach. Guilford Press.

Heilman, M. E. (2012). Gender stereotypes and workplace bias. Research in Organizational Behavior, 32, 113-135.

IPEA (2019). Atlas da violência. Brasília: Fórum Brasileiro de Segurança Pública.

Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1–27.

Jost, J. T. (2019). A quarter century of system justification theory: Questions, answers, criticisms, and societal applications. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58(2), 263–314.

Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. Plenum Press.

Lerner, M. J., & Miller, D. T. (1978). Just world research and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead. Psychological Bulletin, 85(5), 1030-1051.

Lerner, M. J., & Simmons, C. H. (1966). Observer’s reaction to the ‘‘innocent victim’’: Compassion or rejection? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 203-210.

Lila, M., Gracia, E., & García, F. (2013). Ambivalent sexism, empathy and law enforcement attitudes towards partner violence against women among male police officers. Psychology, Crime & Law, 19 (10), 907-919.

Lima- Nunes, A., Pereira, C. R., & Correia, I. (2013). Restricting the scope of justice to justify discrimination: the role played by justice perceptions in discrimination against immigrants. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 627–636.

Lima, T. J. S., Pereira, C. R., Torres, A. R. R., Souza, L. E. C., & Alburquerque, I. M. (2019). Black people are convicted more for being black than for being poor: The role of social norms and cultural prejudice on biased racial judgments. PLoS ONE, 20, 14(9), e0222874.

Modesto, J. G., Minelli, A. C., Fernandes, M. P., Rodrigues, M., Bufolo, R., Bitencourt, R., & Pilati, R. (2017). Racismo e Políticas Afirmativas: Evidências do Modelo da Discriminação Justificada. Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa, 33, 1-8.

Nader, M. B. (2017). In C. Stevens, Silva, E., Oliveira, S., & Zanello, V. (Eds.), Relatos, análises e ações no enfrentamento da violência contra as mulheres (pp.105-130). Technopolitik.

Opotow, S. (2016). Social justice theory and practice: fostering inclusion in exclusionary contexts. In L. Phillip & Jr., Hammack (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Social Psychology and Social Justice, (pp. 1-31). Oxford University Press.

Opotow, S. (1990). Moral exclusion and injustice: an introduction. Journal of Social Issues, 46(1), 1–20.

Opotow, S. (2001). Social injustice. In D. J. Christie, R. V. Wagner, & D. D. Winter (Eds.), Peace, conflict and violence: Peace psychology for the 21st century (pp. 102–109). Prentice-Hall.

Opotow, S., & Weiss, L. (2000). Denial and exclusion in environmental conflict. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 475–490.

Paiva, T. T., Pereira, C. R., Silva, E. M. L., & Pimental, C. E. (2021). Development and validation of the acceptance of violence against women scale (AVAWS). Manuscript submitted for publication.

Pereira, C. R., & Souza, L. E. C. (2016). Fatores legitimadores da discriminação: uma revisão teórica. Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa, 32 (2), 1-10.

Pereira, C. R., & Vala, J. (2010). Do preconceito à discriminação justificada. In-Mind_Português, 1(2-3), 1–13.

Pereira, C. R., Mateus, K. S., & Santos, M. F. (2019). Do preconceito à discriminação: o papel da legitimação das desigualdades sociais. In S. C. Maciel, & P. N. Fônseca (Eds.), Psicologia Social: Vertentes e perspectivas (pp. 79- 101). Editora UFPB.

Perilloux, C., Duntley, J.D., & Buss, D. M. (2014). Blame attribution in sexual victimization. Personality and Individual Differences, 63, 81–86.

Pimentel, C. E., Gouveia, V. V., Diniz, P. K. C., Saenz, D. P., Santos, A. M. V., & Vieira, I. S. (2010). Evidências de validade de construto e precisão da Escala Geral do Mundo Justo. Boletim de Psicologia, 60 (133), 167-180.

Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., & Levin, S. (2006). Social Dominance Theory and the Dynamics of Intergroup Relations: Taking Stock and Looking Forward. European Review of Social Psychology, 17, 271-320.

Qualtrics, L. (12 de Novembro de 2014). Qualtrics. Obtido de

Rollero, C., Bergagna, E., & Tartaglia, S. (2019). What is violence? The role of sexism and social dominance orientation in recognizing violence against women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1-18.

Russell, K. J., & Hand, C. J. (2017). Rape myth acceptance, victim blame attribution and Just World Beliefs: A rapid evidence assessment. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 37, 153–160.

Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: na intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Opression. Cambridge University Press.

Valor-Segura, I., Expósito, F., & Moya, M. (2011). Victim blaming and exoneration of the perpetrator in domestic violence: the role of beliefs in a just world and ambivalent sexism. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 14 (1), 195-206.

Verniers, C., & Vala, J. (2018). Justifying gender discrimination in the workplace: The mediating role of motherhood myths. Plos One, 13(1), 1-23.

Viki, G.T., Abrams, D., & Hutchison, P. (2003). The “true” romantic: benevolent sexism and paternalistic chivalry. Sex Roles, 49, 533-537.

Walker, L. E. (1989). Psychology and violence against women. American Psychologist, 44(4), 695–702.

World Health Organization (WHO, 2020). Global, regional and national prevalence estimates for intimate partner violence against women and global and regional prevalence estimates for non-partner sexual violence against women. World Health Organization.

Zhang, Z., & Yuan, K.H. (2018). Practical Statistical Power Analysis Using Webpower and R (Eds). ISDSA Press.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2021 Tamyres Tomaz Paiva, Cicero Roberto Pereira