The relationship between injustice and crime: A general strain theory approach

• Various types of injustice differentially predict the intention to engage in crime.
• Two forms of injustice are sufficient to promote criminal coping.
• The relationship between injustice and crime is mediated by situational anger.
• Intending to use violence is associated with procedural and distributive injustice.
• Excessive drinking is influenced by interactional and distributive injustice.

PurposeConnect General Strain Theory (GST) and the organizational justice literature by examining how different types and combinations of major forms of injustice (distributive, procedural, and interactional), and resultant anger, may increase the likelihood that individuals respond to strain with crime.MethodLogit and OLS regressions are used to analyze survey data obtained from a vignette that was randomly assigned to a sample of undergraduates. The vignette presented a distributive injustice and manipulated the additional presence of procedural and interactional injustice. Respondents rated their likelihood of intending to engage in a violent act and a non-violent deviant act.ResultsAs expected, multiple types of injustice foster the intention of responding to injustice with crime. In addition to a distributive injustice, the presence of procedural injustice predicts violence, while interactional injustice predicts excessive drinking. Moreover, anger mediates the injustice-crime relationship, although this effect is more substantial for the association between procedural injustice and violence.ConclusionsThe relationship between injustice and crime is complex. Different forms of injustice can affect the propensity for crime through anger. Further research is encouraged to identify the criminogenic potential of certain types of combinations of injustice on the experience of negative emotions and crime.