Exploring potential mediators in the relationship between righteous anger and approval of vigilantism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vigilantism is an extralegal act of beating or killing an accused by a group of vigilantes, posing grave concerns for justice, human rights, and the rule of law. This study contributes by exploring potential mediators between righteous anger and the approval of vigilantism. Moreover, it proposes that the approval of vigilantism is a multidimensional phenomenon, encompassing political encouragement, anger, and police illegitimacy. A multistage sampling was employed to draw the sample, and data were collected from an online survey of 500 university students in Pakistan. The mediation analysis demonstrates that political encouragement, trait anger, and police unlawfulness fully mediate the relationship between righteous anger and the approval of vigilantism. However, counterintuitively, status and relational distance, police fairness, and police effectiveness do not mediate the relationship. These findings suggest that by controlling political encouragement, trait anger, and police unlawfulness, the approval of vigilantism can be reduced and prevented.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".