Abstract
Surveys in the USA, New Zealand, Taiwan, Japan, and China examined attitudes toward the Iraq War and the Cross-Straits Relationship between China and Taiwan. Factor analyses revealed a four-factor solution of justice concerns: (a) national mandate for military intervention, (b) international mandate against military action, (c) procedural justice, and (d) distributive justice issues. Americans and mainland Chinese were significantly different in an in-group favoring direction compared to other societies regarding justice concerns involving their nation. Taiwan, the low-powered society in the Cross-Straits Relationship, was like the uninvolved societies. Justice in international relations is filtered through in-group favoritism for powerful states.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This research was made possible by grant RG04-P-03 from the Chiang Ching-Kuo Foundation for international scholarly exchange. Thanks to the Cross-Cultural Lab at Victoria University and two anonymous reviewers for comments on a previous draft of this article.
Notes
Note. Bold values indicate loadings >.30.
a α = .89. b α = .68. c α = .90. d α = .78.
Note. Bold values indicate loadings >.30. US = United States.
a α = .81. b α = .75. c α = .90. d α = .79.
1The Cross Straits items were worded as conditionals, whereas the Iraq War items were worded as past or present tense.
Note. SDO = social dominance orientation; RWA = Right-Wing Authoritarian; US = United States; NZ = New Zealand; UN = United Nations.
∗p < .05. ∗∗p < .01.
Note. SDO = social dominance orientation; RWA = Right-Wing Authoritarian; UN = United Nations; US = United States.
∗∗∗p < .001.
Note. SDO = social dominance orientation; RWA = Right-Wing Authoritarian; US = United States; UN = United Nations.
∗∗∗p < .001.