(In)congruence Between Justice Beliefs and Justice Experiences Predicts Adolescents' Prosocial Behaviors: Response Surface Analysis

Introduction: Literature shows that justice beliefs and justice experience (peer victimization) shape adolescent prosociality. However, how adolescents react to the (in)congruence between justice beliefs and justice experiences in peer environments remains unclear. Methods: We utilized response surface analysis to examine how belief-experience justice (in)congruence affects adolescents' prosocial behaviors. Results: Study 1 with a cross-sectional design (N = 2963, M_age = 15.86 ± 0.72, 40.0% girls) showed that, generally, adolescents with stronger justice beliefs and more justice experiences were more likely to engage in global prosocial behaviors, which increased with the belief-experience justice fit; when adolescents encountered belief-experience justice conflicts, their beliefs played a more crucial role than experiences in driving prosocial actions. Study 2 with two-wave data (N = 3038, M_age = 16.83 ± 0.79, 53.6% girls) essentially replicated the cross-sectional pattern in Study 1 and further found that adolescents' beliefs no longer dominantly promoted prosociality seven months later under belief-experience conflicts. Moreover, boys and girls behave differently depending on prosocial contexts, especially according to situational visibility. Conclusion: These findings demonstrate that even in unjust peer environments, adolescents' justice beliefs are resilient enough to guide them toward current prosocial actions, which yet would fade over time.