Judgments of Responsibility for Inequality: A Framework and Review

Decades of psychological research have led to a better understanding of the factors that influence people's causal explanations of inequalities, such as the racial wealth gap. But our understanding of the psychology of inequality remains limited because this research has largely focused on causal and retrospective judgments. In this article, we argue that two distinctions are valuable for clarifying judgments of responsibility for inequality: the moral-causal distinction and the retrospective-prospective distinction. The moral-causal distinction differentiates judgments of agents' blameworthiness and obligation (moral) from judgments of their contribution to an outcome (causal). The retrospective-prospective distinction differentiates judgments about the agents, actions, and conditions that led to historical or present inequalities (retrospective) from judgments about what agents can or should do to remedy existing inequalities and prevent them in the future (prospective). We summarize existing research on how sociocultural, emotional, motivational, and cognitive factors affect the four categories of judgments defined by this framework. In doing so, we identify important gaps and highlight directions for future research that will allow us to better explain, predict, and shape judgments relating to inequality.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Perspectives on Psychological Science
Published
2026-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916251393206
Primary Topic
Social and Intergroup Psychology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Judgments of Responsibility for Inequality: A Framework and Review

Tania Lombrozo, Casey Lewry
Perspectives on Psychological Science
Social and Intergroup Psychology
article

Judgments of Responsibility for Inequality: A Framework and Review

Tania Lombrozo, Casey Lewry
article en

Abstract

Decades of psychological research have led to a better understanding of the factors that influence people's causal explanations of inequalities, such as the racial wealth gap. But our understanding of the psychology of inequality remains limited because this research has largely focused on causal and retrospective judgments. In this article, we argue that two distinctions are valuable for clarifying judgments of responsibility for inequality: the moral-causal distinction and the retrospective-prospective distinction. The moral-causal distinction differentiates judgments of agents' blameworthiness and obligation (moral) from judgments of their contribution to an outcome (causal). The retrospective-prospective distinction differentiates judgments about the agents, actions, and conditions that led to historical or present inequalities (retrospective) from judgments about what agents can or should do to remedy existing inequalities and prevent them in the future (prospective). We summarize existing research on how sociocultural, emotional, motivational, and cognitive factors affect the four categories of judgments defined by this framework. In doing so, we identify important gaps and highlight directions for future research that will allow us to better explain, predict, and shape judgments relating to inequality.

Perspectives on Psychological ScienceVol. 21(1)
Princeton University (US)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 96%
Social and Intergroup Psychology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.