Alle Publikationen
- <<
- <
- 1
2017
-
(2017): Justice and Fairness in Negotiation. In: Group Decision and Negotiation 26 (1), S. 9-17. DOI: 10.1007/s10726-016-9496-4
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-016-9496-4 Abstract: In this special issue we display a variety of approaches to the study of justice. Articles from scholars working on questions involving justice and fairness in decision making exchanges calls attention to a variety of research approaches, issue domains, cases and hypotheses used to explore these questions. All of the contributions emphasize analysis, using quantitative and qualitative methods including simulation-experiments, comparative case studies, statistical analyses and game theory. The articles in this collection reveal that justice and fairness concerns extend from the negotiation process to the outcome and into the implementation stage. They share the underlying expectation that individuals and groups gravitate toward fairness and justice in their exchanges with others. Therefore, a full understanding of group decision processes will be incomplete if justice and fairness issues are not considered alongside issues such as power distributions and alternatives to an agreeme nt. The authors also suggest that outcomes built on justice and fairness principles will enhance the efficiency, stability and implementation of the negotiated agreements. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
-
(2017): Employee conscientiousness, agreeableness, and supervisor justice rule compliance. A three-study investigation. In: The Journal of applied psychology 102 (11), S. 1564-1589. DOI: 10.1037/apl0000248
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000248 Abstract: Researchers have paid limited attention to what makes organizational authority figures decide to treat their employees either justly or unjustly. Drawing from the actor-focused model of justice, as well as the stereotype content model, we argue that employee conscientiousness and agreeableness can impact the extent to which supervisors adhere to normative rules for distributive, procedural, informational, and interpersonal justice, as a result of supervisors' evaluations of their employees' effort and their liking of the employees. Supervisory compliance with justice rules may, in turn, impact the extent to which employees judge themselves to be treated either justly or unjustly. We tested these possibilities in 3 studies. In Study 1, we utilized a meta-analysis to demonstrate positive relationships between employees' conscientiousness, agreeableness, and their justice perceptions. In Study 2, we conducted 3 experiments to test the causal relationship between employee personality and supervisor intentions to comply with justice rules. In Study 3, we conducted an employee-supervisor dyadic field survey to examine the entire mediation model. Results are discussed in terms of the potential roles that both employees and supervisors may play in shaping employees' justice perceptions. (PsycINFO Database Record zitiert von 1
-
(2017): The Rawlsian Critique of Utilitarianism. A Luhmannian Interpretation. In: Journal of Business Ethics 142 (1), S. 25-35. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-015-2786-y
Abstract: The present paper builds on the Rawlsian critique of utilitarianism in order to identify the moral implications of Niklas Luhmann's social systems theory. While Luhmann aptly discerned the pervasive problems of the precarious system-environment relations throughout the modern society, he took moral communication to be person-centered and thus ill-equipped to deal with these problems. At the same time, the Rawlsian possibility of sacrificing fundamental liberties for the sake of economic gains not only exemplifies the Luhmannian precariousness of the relations of the economic system to its societal environment, but also shows this precariousness to be a moral problem. Thus, from the systems-theoretic perspective, the Rawlsian idea of justice denotes the moral dimension of the capacity of the societal environment to carry the economic system. More generally, the proposed complementarity between Rawls and Luhmann allows to see the precariousness of system-environment relations, for any type of social system, as a moral problem. Two implications follow. First, the morally problematic manifestations of the precarious system-environment relations are not limited to the Rawlsian case of the discrimination of the least advantaged groups but rather include a broad range of social costs and damaging effects of business on society and nature. Second, and related, the proposed systems-theoretic perspective explicates the moral value of sustainability of the economic as well as other social systems in their environment, societal and ecological alike.
Keywords: BUSINESS, business ethics, ethics, CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP, Disziplin, Economic system, Ethik, Gesellschaftsprofit, John Rawls, Justice, Kosten-Nutzen, Luhmann, Moral, moralische Dimension, Moralphilosophie, Morals, Moraltheorie, Niklas Luhmann, Philosophie, Rawls, SOCIAL COSTS, social systems, Societal environment, SYSTEMS, Utilitarianism, Utilitarismus 2016
-
(2016): Fairness Means More to Some Than Others. In: Journal of Management 43 (2), S. 293-318. DOI: 10.1177/0149206314527132
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314527132 Abstract: We examined when job embeddedness might serve as a boundary condition between interactional fairness and employee behavior. Specifically, we explored whether elements of affective attachment associated with job embeddedness moderated relations of supervisors’ interactional fairness with citizenship behavior and production deviance. Results from a field and a scenario study supported the idea that interactional fairness exerts a stronger effect on these outcomes for employees embedded in their jobs than for their less attached coworkers. We found this result even after controlling for turnover intent. Practical implications and directions for future research are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
-
(2016): Interkulturelle Psychologie. Verstehen und Handeln in internationalen Kontexten. Göttingen: Hogrefe
Abstract: Dieses Buch beleuchtet auf der Grundlage von psychologischen Theorien und Forschungsergebnissen die psychischen Prozesse, die beim Aufeinandertreffen von Menschen aus verschiedenen Kulturen beteiligt sind. Anhand von Fallbeispielen werden typische interkulturelle Begegnungssituationen geschildert und analysiert. Weitere Kapitel thematisieren, wie interkulturelle Handlungskompetenz entsteht, und zeigen Möglichkeiten auf, diese anhand von interkulturellen Trainings zu fördern. - Inhalt: (1) Einführung: Kultur und interkulturelle Interaktion. (2) Interkulturelles Handeln und psychologische Prozesse. (3) Entwicklung des Selbstbildes, des Fremdbildes und des vermuteten Fremdbildes. (4) Entwicklung des Fremdverstehens. (5) Entwicklung und Wirkungen interpersonaler Interaktionsprozesse in interkulturellen Kontexten [Sozialer Vergleich; Gerechtigkeit; soziale Interdependenz; Macht und soziale Dominanz; soziale Netzwerke; Konflikte; Minoritäten]. . (6) Stress und Stressbewältigung im Kontext interkulturellen Handelns. (7) Entwicklung interkultureller Handlungskompetenz. (8) Interkulturelle Trainings. (9) Interkulturelle Psychologie in der Praxis. zitiert von 4
Keywords: conflict, Context, Cross Cultural Communication, Cross Cultural Psychology, Cultural Sensitivity, dominance, Entreprises multinationales, Ethnopsychologie, Gestion interculturelle, Interpersonal Control, Interpersonal Interaction, Justice, Kulturforschung/ kulturelle Unterschiede, Self-Concept, Sensitivity Training, Social Comparison, social networks, Social Perception, Stress -
(2016): The Joint Effects of Justice Climate, Group Moral Identity, and Corporate Social Responsibility on the Prosocial and Deviant Behaviors of Groups. In: Journal of Business Ethics 137 (4), S. 677-697. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-015-2748-4
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2748-4 Abstract: Pulling from theories of social exchange, deonance, and fairness heuristics, this study focuses on the relationship between overall justice climate and both the prosocial and deviant behaviors of groups. Specifically, it considers two contextual boundary conditions on this effect—corporate social responsibility (CSR) and group moral identity. Results from a laboratory experiment are presented, which show a significant effect for overall justice climate and a two-way interaction between overall justice climate and CSR on group-level prosocial and deviant behaviors, and a marginally significant interaction of group moral identity with overall justice climate on group deviance. The implications of contextual influences on workplace ethics and justice are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
-
(2016): When Justice Promotes Injustice. Why Minority Leaders Experience Bias When They Adhere to Interpersonal Justice Rules. In: Academy of Management Journal 59 (4), S. 1150-1173. DOI: 10.5465/amj.2014.0275
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2014.0275 Abstract: Accumulated knowledge on organizational justice leaves little reason to doubt that organizational members benefit when leaders adhere to interpersonal justice rules. However, upon considering how justice behaviors influence subordinates’ cognitive processes, we predict that interpersonal justice has a surprising, unintended negative consequence. Supervisors who violate interpersonal justice rules trigger subordinates to search for reasons why their supervisors are threatening them, causing subordinates to be more attuned to supervisors’ individual characteristics and therefore unlikely to use stereotypes when evaluating them. In contrast, supervisors who adhere to interpersonal justice rules allow subordinates to divert attention away from them, leading subordinates’ judgments of their supervisors to be influenced by stereotypes. Consistent with these predictions, using field data we found that minority supervisors faced bias relative to Caucasian supervisors when s uperviso rs adhered to—but not when they violated—interpersonal justice rules. We replicated this effect in an experiment and established that it is explained by an alternating pattern of stereotype application and inhibition: the stereotype that minority supervisors are more deceitful than Caucasians influenced fairness judgments when supervisors adhered to—but not when they violated—interpersonal justice rules. We then conducted exploratory analyses and identified one factor (unit size) that mitigates this troubling pattern. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved) zitiert von 5
2015
-
(2015): Justice, Fairness, and Employee Reactions. In: Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 2 (1), S. 75-99. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111457
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111457 Abstract: Of all the issues that employees consider in organizational life, justice and fairness are among the most salient. Justice reflects the perceived adherence to rules that represent appropriateness in decision contexts (e.g., equity, consistency, respect, truthfulness). Fairness reflects a more global perception of appropriateness that lies downstream of justice. Our review integrates justice theories (fairness heuristic theory, the relational model, the group engagement model, fairness theory, deonance theory, uncertainty management theory) and broader theories (social exchange theory, affective events theory) to examine three questions: (a) Why do employees think about justice issues in the first place? (b) how do employees form fairness perceptions? and (c) how do employees react to those perceptions? We close by describing how justice and fairness can be managed in organizations, especially given new technological trends in how people work. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 AP A, all rights reserved)
-
(2015) : Moral Reasoning in Psychology In: Wright, James D.: International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition): Oxford: Elsevier, S. 803-805
Abstract: Developmental research has focused on reasoning about right and wrong in social relationships. Piaget and Kohlberg each proposed sequences in which children first develop moral judgments that are confused with nonmoral features, such as adherence to social conventions, and then judgments differentiating them from each other. However, subsequent research shows that young children form concepts in the moral domain with understandings of welfare and fairness, differing from judgments about social conventions. Moral decisions entail coordination of different concerns – moral and nonmoral – in situational contexts. Individuals critically apply moral judgments to cultural practices entailing social inequalities.
2014
-
(2014): Gerechtigkeitsurteile und Konflikte. Warum Menschen unfaire Informationen bevorzugen. In: Konfliktdynamik 3 (1), S. 8-17
Abstract: Grunde fur die Bevorzugung unfairer Informationen in Konflikten werden reflektiert. Nach einem Einblick in Prozesse der fairessrelevanten Informationssuche in Konfliktsituationen werden basierend auf der Theorie der kognitiven Dissonanz und der Fairness-Heuristik-Theorie Bewertungsprozesse erlautert. Anhand empirischer Befunde wird die Praferenz von Informationen verdeutlicht, die eine unfaire Wahrnehmung unterstutzen. Als Ursache fur diese Praferenz wird die unterschiedliche Glaubwurdigkeit von als fair und als unfair wahrgenommenen Informationen diskutiert, aus der diefolgende Hypothese abgeleitet wird: Wahrend wahrgenommene Fairness als zweifelhaft beurtielt wird wird und somit eine vertiefende der Informationssuche hervorruft, wird Unfairnessempfinden als so uberzeugend wahrgenommen, dass es zur Bestatigung des ersten Eindrucks motiviert. Die Bedeutung dieser Prozesse fur die Vermittlung von positiven Fairnessinformationen in Konfliktsituationen und fur die Konfliktlosung wird verdeutlicht. Source: 978-3-642-19034-6
2012
-
(2012): The intersection of justice and leadership. Testing a moderation model of contingent reward and interpersonal fairness. In: European Management Journal 30 (6), S. 490-498. DOI: 10.1016/j.emj.2012.03.003
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2012.03.003 Abstract: Previous studies show the positive impact of contingent reward on satisfaction, but few have examined moderators of this effect. We theorized that interpersonal fairness—treating people with dignity and respect—moderates the contingent reward effect because it creates the situation in which followers can positively engage with contingent reward efforts from their leaders. We therefore examined how interpersonal fairness moderates the contingent reward effect, finding that the positive impact of contingent rewards is stronger as interpersonal fairness increases. The implication of the finding is that using contingent rewards may only be effective when implemented in a polite, respectful manner represented by interpersonal fairness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
-
(2012): Justice and Conflicts. Theoretical and Empirical Contributions. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
Abstract: Explained the complex construct of moral courage. Moral courage is defined as courageous behavior accompanied by anger and indignation which intends to enforce societal and ethical norms without regard to one's own social costs. It is the risk of negative social consequences that distinguishes moral courage from other forms of prosocial behavior. Similarities and differences between moral courage, heroism, and social control are discussed. Determinants promoting or inhibiting morally courageous behavior include situational factors and particular personality traits including justice sensitivity, empathy, high self-assurance, and open-mindedness. The presence or absence of others has been found to be a particularly significant determinant of helping behavior but not morally courageous behavior. Training programs designed to promote moral courage are outlined. In summary, moral courage is an important concept and should be promoted within society. zitiert von: 59
2011
-
(2011) : Motive fairen und nicht-solidarischen Verhaltens: Korruption: Forschungsstand, Prävention, Probleme: Lengerich, Germany: Pabst Science Publishers
Abstract: Ausgehend von der Feststellung, dass sich die Psychologie bisher wenig mit dem Thema "Korruption" auseinandergesetzt hat, werden mogliche psychologische Beitrage zu einer Korruptionsforschung besprochen. Dabei werden psychologische Theorien und Forschungsergebnisse zu "Gerechtigkeit und Fairness" (Organisationsgerechtigkeit als theoretische Basis; distributive Gerechtigkeit bzw. Fairness; prozedurale Fairness; Interaktionsfairness) sowie zu "Fairness und Teameffizienz" dargestellt. Im Rahmen des zuletzt genannten Punktes wird uber eine Studie berichtet, in der das Gerechtigkeitserleben bei der Teamarbeit untersucht wurde. Es zeigte sich unter anderem, dass die Grundeinstellung zu einer Aufgabe ausschlaggebend dafur ist, inwieweit jemand eine Teamarbeit akzeptiert und effizient im Team arbeitet. Die realen vorhandenen Arbeitsbedingungen, sowie die Art und Weise der Aufgabenverteilung (Losverfahren) beeinflussen die Teameffizienz nicht. Fairness und "Social Loafing" sind dagegen starke Pradiktoren fur Teameffizienz. Je weniger Fairness vorhanden ist, desto weniger erfolgreich ist ein Team.
2010
-
(2010) : Reasoning, Moral and Social In: Peterson, Penelope: International encyclopedia of education: 3. ed.: Amsterdam: Elsevier, S. 279-284
Abstract: Significant changes occur from early childhood through adolescence in the ways that individuals engage in social and moral reasoning. Moral reasoning refers to considerations of justice, others' welfare, and rights. Social reasoning includes social-conventional reasoning about customs, conventions, etiquette, as well as psychological reasoning about autonomy, individuality, and personal choice. The historical background of moral and social reasoning is described, including short descriptions of the stage-oriented research by Jean Piaget and Lawrence Kohlberg, followed by current domain-specific approach to reasoning, the work of Elliot Turiel, Judith Smetana, Melanie Killen, and Larry Nucci. Current research reveals how children and adolescents evaluate social issues using moral and social reasoning. Furthermore, the cross-cultural findings of research based on current social and moral reasoning have established patterns that are common and different across a wide range of cultures.
2004
-
Peterson, Christopher (2004): Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification.. Kapitel: Fairness. pp. 391-412. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, zuletzt geprüft am 08.03.2018
Abstract: In their book 'Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification,' Peterson and Seligman present a taxonomy of character strengths and virtues. This chapter specifically examines fairness. The chapter provides a consensual definition of fairness, and discusses its theoretical traditions; measures; correlates and consequences; development; enabling and inhibiting factors; gender, cross-national, and cross-cultural aspects; and deliberate interventions for cultivating fairness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
Keywords: Fairnesstheorie, Human Sex Differences, Cross Cultural Differences, Intervention, Fairness, Justice, Kulturforschung/ kulturelle Unterschiede, Morality, Personality Development, Personality Measures, Personality Theory, Personality Traits, Positive Psychology, Sociocultural Factors, Taxonomies 2000
-
(2000) : Zur Rolle von Begrifflichkeiten: Die Auswirkungen eines Gerechtigkeitsrahmens auf die Aufschlüsselung eines moralischen Dilemmas : Eine Forschungsnotiz In: Edelstein, Wolfgang; Nunner-Winkler, Gertrud (Hg.): Moral im sozialen Kontext: 1. Aufl.: Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp (Suhrkamp Taschenbuch Wissenschaft), S. 234-258
Abstract: Anhand ausgewählter empirischer Daten wird belegt, dass moralische Dilemmata im Sinne von L. Kohlberg in einer Gerechtigkeitsperspektive "gerahmt" werden können und dass dieses "Framimg" sich grundlegend von der gewöhnlichen Perspektive unterscheidet. Herangezogen werden dabei moralische Dilemmata im Rahmen von Partnerschaftskonflikten. Es wird versucht, die Effekte eines solchen Gerechtigkeits-Framings angemessen zu interpretieren. In diesem Zusammenhang wird Gerechtigkeit als Repräsentation des Politischen analysiert. zitiert von: 5
1998
-
Bierhoff, Hans-Werner (1998): Aggression und Gewalt. Phänomene Ursachen und Interventionen. Ärger, Aggression und Gerechtigkeit: Moralische Empörung und antisoziales Verhalten. Stuttgart [u.a.]: Kohlhammer
Abstract: Der Zusammenhang zwischen Fairness bzw. Unfairness und aggressivem Verhalten wird vorgestellt. Die in der Psychologie bekannten Fairness-Regeln werden skizziert, und es wird gezeigt, dass Verletzungen dieser Regeln drei unterscheidbare Reaktionstypen auslösen: Ärger, Selbstabwertung, zunehmende Leistungsbereitschaft. Insbesondere der Zusammenhang zwischen Ärger und aggressivem Verhalten (im Kontext von Gerechtigkeit und Verantwortung) wird unter Bezugnahme auf empirische Daten behandelt. Im weiteren wird die Theorie der relativen Deprivation beschrieben, die sich mit dem Phänomen des Ärgers aufgrund steigender Erwartungen befasst und die einen Spezialfall wahrgenommener Unfairness darstellt. Abschließend wird diskutiert, ob die Auslösung von Ärger und Aggression durch Unfairness und Verletzung normativer Erwartungen eher soziobiologisch oder eher soziokulturell erklärt werden kann.
1992
-
(1992): Prozedurale Gerechtigkeit. Das Wie und Warum der Fairness. In: Zeitschrift fur Sozialpsychologie 23 (3), S. 163-178. Online verfügbar unter http://econtent.hogrefe.com/loi/zspx
Abstract: Presents an overview of social psychological research on procedural fairness. The author then differentiates between distributive, interactional and procedural fairness. In addition, several procedures which are widely applied to conflict resolution are identified and their potential effects on perceived fairness are analyzed. Process control effects (i.e., voice) and appeal are emphasized as two important features of the conflict-resolution process. Finally, several theories of procedural justice are described including an attributional framework, referent cognitions theory, impression-management theory, and the mediatory model of distributive and procedural justice. In general, the application of the procedural justice concept in organizational conflicts and in the legal system is emphasized. Ein Uberblick uber die sozialpsychologische Forschung zur prozeduralen Gerechtigkeit wird gegeben. Zunachst wird die Unterscheidung zwischen distributiver, interaktionaler und prozeduraler Fairness erlautert. Dann werden Kriterien der Fairness im Zusammenhang mit diesen drei Formen von Fairness besprochen. Weiterhin werden mehrere Verfahren, die vielfach zur Konfliktlosung angewandt werden, im Hinblick auf ihre Auswirkungen auf die wahrgenommene Fairness analysiert. Effekte der Prozesskontrolle und Berufung werden als zwei wichtige Elemente der Konfliktlosung besonders betont. Abschliessend werden verschiedene Theorien der prozeduralen Gerechtigkeit beschrieben: (1) attributionstheoretischer Ansatz, (2) Referent-Cognitions-Theorie, (3) Impression-Management-Theorie, (4) Mediationsmodell distributiver und prozeduraler Fairness.
-
(1992): Fairness und Gerechtigkeit in entwicklungspsychologischer Perspektive
Abstract: Fairness und Gerechtigkeit werden in ihrer Bedeutung fur menschliches Handeln im Sport sowie fur die Gruppenerziehung diskutiert. Ausgehend von einer Skizze von Kohlbergs Theorie der Moralentwicklung werden zunachst Prinzipien und Probleme der Gruppenerziehung dargestellt. Daran anschliessend werden Uberlegungen zur Entwicklung intersubjektiver Perspektiven in der Adoleszenz vorgestellt, die in eine Theorie der Freundschaft munden. Vor diesem Hintergrund wird das Verhaltnis von gelungenen Sozialbeziehungen und demokratischen Einstellungen erortert. Schliesslich wird versucht, einen der Philosophie entnommenen Begriff der Fairness mit gruppenpsychologischen Uberlegungen zu verbinden.
-
(1992) : Arger-, Vorwurf- und verwandte Emotionen In: Mees, Ulrich: Psychologie des Ärgers: Göttingen: Hogrefe
Abstract: Explores anger, blame, and related emotions (such as self-directed anger and empathic indignation), specifying their constitutive characteristics, their variants, their typical action patterns, and their intensity variables. Included is a discussion of the relationship between anger and the assignment of responsibility or blame. Furthermore, perceived injustice is discussed as a frequent precursor of anger. Envy, jealousy, pain, disappointment, scorn, and hate are explicated as members of the family of anger emotions. An empirical study of intensity indicators for anger is reported. In conclusion, metaphors and metonymies of anger or rage are discussed. Arger-, Vorwurf- und "verwandte" Emotionen (wie Selbstarger und empathische Entrustung) werden in ihren konstitutiven Merkmalen, ihren Varianten, ihren typischen Handlungen und ihren Intensitatsvariablen spezifiziert. Daruber hinaus erfolgt eine Diskussion des Zusammenhangs zwischen einer Verantwortlichkeits- bzw. Schuldzuschreibung und Arger. Ferner wird die wahrgenommene Ungerechtigkeit als haufiger Anlass von Arger thematisiert. Als "Familie" der Arger-Emotionen werden Neid, Eifersucht, Leid, Enttauschung, Verachtung und Hass erortert. Ferner wird eine empirische Studie zu den Intensitatsindikatoren des Argers referiert. Abschliessend werden Metaphern und Metonymien des Argers bzw. der Wut erlautert.
Keywords: Anger, Disappointment, Emotions, Emotionsforschung, Guilt, Hate, Jealousy, Justice, responsibility, Verhaltensforschung 1984
-
(1984): Gerechtigkeit und ihre Veranderung aus entwicklungspsychologischer Sicht. In: Universitas 39 (10), S. 1079-1089
Abstract: With resources running short, social contrasts growing sharper, and international tensions increasing it appears more than ever necessary to pay attention to justice and fairness in solving social and political problems. Psychologists have now also taken on the analysis of the equity phenomenon. Developmental psychology asks questions like: How does the sense of equity develop? How do ideas about equity change in the course of the human life? Nachdem es angesichts knapper werdender Ressourcen, sich verscharfender sozialer Gegensatze und zunehmender internationaler Spannungen mehr denn je notig erscheint, auf die Gerechtigkeit und Fairness der Losung sozialer, gesellschaftlicher und politischer Probleme zu achten, hat sich auch die Psychologie der Analyse von Gerechtigkeitsphanomenen angenommen. Die Entwicklungspsychologie etwa stellt folgende Fragen: Wie kommt es zur Herausbildung eines Gerechtigkeitsbegriffs? Wie verandern sich Gerechtigkeitsvorstellungen im Laufe des menschlichen Lebens?
- <<
- <
- 1