Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-2r2wp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-15T15:29:33.063Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Justice, egocentrism, and resource-rational contractualism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 June 2026

Elizabeth Mullen Open the ORCID record for Elizabeth Mullen [Opens in a new window]  and
Christopher W. Bauman Open the ORCID record for Christopher W. Bauman [Opens in a new window]
Elizabeth Mullen*
Affiliation:
San José State University, Lucas College of Business One Washington Square San Jose, CA 95192, USA elizabeth.mullen@sjsu.edu
Christopher W. Bauman
Affiliation:
University of California Irvine Paul Merage School of Business 4291 Pereira Drive Irvine, CA 92697, USA chris.bauman@uci.edu
*
*Corresponding author.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We identify broad overlap between the contractualist model and theories of justice and argue the contractualist model would benefit from integrating insights from the justice literature. We also highlight negotiations research on egocentrism and other limits on people’s abilities to mentally simulate negotiations. These literatures support some elements of the contractualist model and challenge others.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 49 , 2026 , e151
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2026. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267–299). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60108-2 Google Scholar
Burrus, J., & Mattern, K. D. (2010). Equity, egoism, and egocentrism: The formation of distributive justice judgments. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 32(2), 155–164. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973531003738593 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, J. R., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2014). Egocentrism drives misunderstanding in conflict and negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 51, 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.11.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice?. Journal of Social Issues, 31(3), 137–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1975.tb01000.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiske, A. P. (1992). The four elementary forms of sociality: Framework for a unified theory of social relations. Psychological Review, 99(4), 689–723. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.99.4.689 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Graham, J., Haidt, J., Koleva, S., Motyl, M., Iyer, R., Wojcik, S. P., & Ditto, P. H. (2013). Chapter two - moral foundations theory: The pragmatic validity of moral pluralism. In P. Devine & A. Plant (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 47, pp. 55–130). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-407236-7.00002-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, J., & Colquitt, J. A. (Eds.). (2005). Handbook of organizational justice. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hollander-Blumoff, R. & Tyler, T. R. (2008). Procedural justice in negotiation: Procedural fairness, outcome acceptance, and integrative potential. Law & Social Inquiry, 33(2), 473–500. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4469.2008.00110.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships. In Gergen, K. J., Greenberg, M. S., & White, R. H. (Eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research (pp. 27–55). Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lind, E. A. (2001). Fairness heuristic theory: Justice judgments as pivotal cognitions in organizational relations. In Greenberg, J., & Cropanzano, R. (Eds.), Advances in organization justice (pp. 56–88). Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Lind, E. A. & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural fairness. Plenum.Google Scholar
Mullen, E., & Skitka, L. J. (2006). When outcomes prompt criticism of procedures: An analysis of the Rodney King case. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 6(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-2415.2006.00100.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neale, M. A., & Bazerman, M. H. (1985). The effects of framing and negotiator overconfidence on bargaining behaviors and outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 28(1), 34–49. https://doi.org/10.5465/256060 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parfit, D. (2011). On what matters: Volume one. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Shweder, R. A. & Haidt, J. (1993). The future of moral psychology: Truth, intuition, and the pluralist way. Psychological Science, 4, 360–365. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1993.tb00582.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skitka, L. J., Bauman, C. W., & Lytle, B. L. (2009). Limits on legitimacy: Moral and religious convictions as constraints on deference to authority. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(4), 567–578. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015998 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Skitka, L. J., Bauman, C. W., & Mullen, E. (2008). Morality and justice: An expanded theoretical perspective and empirical review. In Hegtvedt, K. A., & Clay-Warner, J. (Eds.). Advances in group processes: Justice (Vol. 25, pp 1–27). Emerald Group Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0882-6145(08)25017-4 Google Scholar
Skitka, L. J., Bauman, C. W., & Mullen, E. (2016). Morality and justice. In Sabbagh, C. & Schmitt, M. (Eds.) Handbook of social justice theory and research (pp. 407–423). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-3216-0_22 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, L. & Loewenstein, G. (1992). Egocentric interpretations of fairness and interpersonal conflict. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 51(2), 176–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(92)90010-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van den Bos, K., & Lind, E. A. (2002). Uncertainty management by means of fairness judgments. In Zanna, M. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, (Vol. 34, pp. 1–60). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(02)80003-X Google Scholar
van Prooijen, J.-W. (2008). Egocentrism in procedural justice effects. In Hegtvedt, K. A., & Clay-Warner, J. (Eds.) Advances in group processes: Justice (Vol. 25, pp 29–54). Emerald Group Publishing.Google Scholar