Search

Background: While prior studies have established a close association between the use of social network sites (SNSs) and materialistic values, there is limited understanding of the mediating and moderating mechanisms related to important self-related processes, such as self-control and self-acceptance. This paper explores whether and how these factors play a role in comprehending online behavior. One could state that frequent SNS use may pose a risk of virtual addiction, may be related to decreased self-control capacity, and may increase attention to material information on SNS, thereby making it more likely that users affiliate with behaviors associated with materialistic values. In contrast, self-acceptance, as a stable self-process indicating a genuine alignment with one's true self and the ability to make decisions based on inner needs, may be related with reduced engagement in complex information on SNSs. Consequently, this could serve as a buffer against excessive SNS use and its potential associations with issues of self-control and materialistic values., Methods: A total of 706 Chinese college students were surveyed in a cross-sectional study. They completed self-report questionnaires including the WeChat use intensity scale, the Material Value Scale, the Trait Self-control Scale, and the Self-acceptance Questionnaire. A moderated mediation model was examined to test predictions., Results: SNS use intensity was positively associated with materialistic values, and self-control partially mediated this association. That is, higher intensity SNS users are more likely lower in self-control, which relates to stronger materialistic values. In addition, the indirect effect through self-control was moderated by self-acceptance, such that this indirect effect was significant only for individuals with low levels of self-acceptance., Conclusions: This study reveals that self-acceptance may be a protective factor that helps to mitigate excessive SNS use and its potential effects on self-control and materialistic values. It further suggests that psychological interventions targeting the enhancement of self-acceptance and self-control could hold promise in alleviating the negative association between SNS use and materialistic values., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Recent research describes how procedural fairness can be used to resolve issues related to ethnic-cultural matters. The central finding in this strand of literature is that when minority members experience procedurally fair treatment by societal actors regarding ethnic-cultural issues, this will lead to a range of outcomes that are beneficial for social cohesion. Although these results are promising, it remains yet to be shown that such group-specific treatment fairness does not hamper social cohesion by inciting misapprehension among members of non-recipient groups. Therefore, the present study set out to examine two central questions. First, how would minority group members respond to treatment fairness of citizens belonging to another minority group? Second, how would majority group members respond to treatment fairness of citizens belonging to minority groups? Two experimental studies (total N  = 908) examined these questions. In Study 1, we compared ethnic-cultural minorities' reactions to procedurally (un)fair treatment of their own versus a different minority group. In Study 2, we compared minority and majority group members' responses to procedurally (un)fair treatment of minority group members. Results show that minority group member reactions to ethnic-cultural procedural fairness emanate from a shared bond with the fairness recipient(s) of the other minority group. Conversely, majority group members' reactions are driven primarily by a perceived moral obligation to act rightfully toward members of disadvantaged groups. Taken together, our results suggest that ethnic-cultural procedural fairness enactment fosters societal unity among different groups, possibly strengthening social cohesion for well-being and prosperity among members of these groups., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Dierckx, Van Hiel, Valcke and van den Bos.)

We examined how observers assess information-poor allegations of harm (e.g., "my word against yours" cases), in which the outcomes of procedurally fair investigations may favor the alleged perpetrator because the evidentiary standards are unmet. Yet this lack of evidence does not mean no harm occurred, and some observers may be charged with deciding whether the allegation is actionable within a collective. On the basis of theories of moral typecasting, procedural justice, and uncertainty management, we hypothesized that observers would be more likely to prioritize the victim's safety (vs. to prioritize due process for the perpetrator) and view the allegation as actionable when the victim-alleged perpetrator dyad members exhibit features that align with stereotypes of victims and perpetrators. We supported our hypothesis with four studies using various contexts, sources of perceived prototypicality, due-process prioritization, and samples (students from New Zealand, N s = 137 and 114; Mechanical Turk workers from the United States; N s = 260 and 336).

Although many studies have examined various aspects of terrorism, relatively little is known about risk indicators associated with specific types of terrorist offences. To partly fill this void, this study explores differences on risk indicators of the Violent Extremism Risk Assessment tool (VERA-2R) between 21 Jihadist offenders who were convicted for homicide and a comparison group of 30 Jihadist offenders convicted for other Jihadist terrorist offences. In doing so, we use judicial data from the European Database of Terrorist offenders (EDT). The results reveal that a number of risk and protective indicators differ between both groups. Both terrorist offender groups often expressed grievances about perceived injustice, but the homicide group more frequently expressed anger, moral outrage, or hatred in response to the perceived injustice than the comparison group. The homicide group also identified their attacks more often than the comparison group, and were more actively engaged in planning and preparation them. Additionally, the homicide group was less often motivated to commit their terrorist offences by group belonging compared with the non-homicide group. With respect to the protective indicators, persons in the comparison group more often reject violence as a means to achieve goals. Although further research is necessary, the results from this study indicate that a differentiated approach might be needed for risk assessment and risk management of the terrorist offender population., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Alberda, Duits, van den Bos, Autsema and Kempes.)

Organizations play a key role in maintaining employee wellbeing. Some research suggests that one way to protect employee wellbeing is to treat them fairly (procedural justice), especially when fair job outcomes (distributive justice) cannot be ensured. Yet, previous studies have not consistently found this interaction effect between distributive and procedural justice. This study investigates job autonomy as a boundary condition to the Distributive Justice × Procedural Justice effect on wellbeing outcomes. To test our hypothesized three-way interaction between distributive justice, procedural justice, and job autonomy, we collected cross-sectional data among Dutch employees in two studies. We used validated self-report measures of our core constructs to test our hypothesis on two employee wellbeing indicators: job satisfaction and emotional exhaustion. Results show a significant three-way interaction effect on both job satisfaction and emotional exhaustion in Study 1 ( N = 411), and a significant three-way interaction effect on emotional exhaustion in Study 2 ( N = 1117). Simple slopes analyses of the significant three-way interactions showed that distributive justice and procedural justice interact to predict wellbeing outcomes among employees with low job autonomy. Among employees with high job autonomy, distributive justice and procedural justice do not interact to predict wellbeing. The results contribute to the employee wellbeing literature by showing that job autonomy is a boundary condition to the Distributive Justice × Procedural Justice effect on wellbeing outcomes. We discuss other implications of our findings for the workplace and the ramifications for employees with low and high job autonomy., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Versteegt, van Dijke, van Ruysseveldt and van den Bos.)

In this manuscript, we introduce a theoretical model of climate radicalization that integrates social psychological theories of perceived unfairness with historical insights on radicalization to contribute to the knowledge of individuals' processes of radicalization and non-radicalization in relation to climate change. We define climate radicalization as a process of growing willingness to pursue and/or support radical changes in society that are in conflict with or could pose a threat to the status quo or democratic legal order to reach climate goals. We describe how perceptions of unfairness can play a pivotal role in processes of climate change related radicalization. Without taking any position or judgment regarding climate concerns and associated actions, we suggest that although these behaviors drive many people to participate in peaceful climate protest, they may also lead others to radicalize into breaking the law to achieve their climate goals, possibly in violent ways. This process of climate radicalization, we argue, can be driven by people perceiving certain situations to be blatantly unfair. Specifically, we discuss how radical attitudes and behaviors can be products of perceived unfairness stemming from the past, the future, the immediate social environments of perceivers, as well as those that are spatially distant from them. We further argue that because radicalization processes are shaped by an interaction between individuals and movements, on the one hand, and societal actors and developments, on the other, they tend to develop in non-linear and dynamic ways. We therefore propose that climate radicalization is a (1) dynamic, contingent, and non-linear process, often of an escalating (and sometimes de-escalating) kind, (2) that develops over time, (3) through various interactions between individuals and their contexts, and (4) in which people and groups move back and forth from peaceful protest, through disobedient and unlawful methods, to violent actions. Implications, strengths, and limitations of our model are discussed., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Jansma, Van den Bos and De Graaf.)

This study aims to put perceived procedural justice to a critical test in the context of Dutch criminal court hearings. To that end, we surveyed 198 criminal defendants to examine whether their perceptions of procedural fairness were significantly associated with trust in judges and intentions to protest against judicial rulings, among other variables. We also examine the possibility that sometimes un fair procedures may have nice aspects, because they offer opportunities to attribute negative outcomes to external causes. Previous studies conducted in different settings support this line of reasoning by showing that associations between perceived procedural justice and other variables are sometimes attenuated or even reversed, particularly when people feel strongly evaluated. The current study takes these insights into the novel context of Dutch criminal court hearings by focusing on defendants with a non-Western ethnic-cultural background. Some of these defendants may feel negatively evaluated by society, which can manifest as a high level of perceived discrimination. Thus, we examine whether the associations between perceived procedural justice and important other variables may be attenuated or reversed depending on respondents' perceptions of everyday discrimination and their outcome judgments. Our results revealed significant associations between perceived procedural justice on the one hand and trust in judges and protest intentions on the other hand, which remained intact regardless of perceptions of everyday discrimination and outcome judgments. Hence, even in this real-life courtroom context, procedural justice was a relevant concern. Taken together, our findings support the importance of perceived procedural justice, even when it is put to a critical test., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Ansems, van den Bos and Mak.)

In this article, we review the psychology of religion and radicalization. In doing so, we note that both macro-level approaches (that study structural conditions in society) and micro-level approaches (that focus on psychological coping and personal appraisal of individual conditions) fail to adequately explain radical behavior of members of extreme religious groups. Instead, we propose that meso-level approaches best explain religious radicalization. These meso-level approaches explain how members of extreme religious groups appraise societal conditions and find redemption in radical beliefs. In particular, we argue for a more in-depth examination of the historical and societal contexts in which various radicalization processes take place and narratives of radical redemption hold sway., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The Dark Triad (i.e., narcissism, psychopathy, Machiavellianism) has garnered intense attention over the past 15 years. We examined the structure of these traits' measure-the Dark Triad Dirty Dozen (DTDD)-in a sample of 11,488 participants from three W.E.I.R.D. (i.e., North America, Oceania, Western Europe) and five non-W.E.I.R.D. (i.e., Asia, Middle East, non-Western Europe, South America, sub-Saharan Africa) world regions. The results confirmed the measurement invariance of the DTDD across participants' sex in all world regions, with men scoring higher than women on all traits (except for psychopathy in Asia, where the difference was not significant). We found evidence for metric (and partial scalar) measurement invariance within and between W.E.I.R.D. and non-W.E.I.R.D. world regions. The results generally support the structure of the DTDD.

Objectives: The Dark Triad traits (i.e., narcissism, psychopathy, Machiavellianism) capture individual differences in aversive personality to complement work on other taxonomies, such as the Big Five traits. However, the literature on the Dark Triad traits relies mostly on samples from English-speaking (i.e., Westernized) countries. We broadened the scope of this literature by sampling from a wider array of countries., Method: We drew on data from 49 countries (N = 11,723; 65.8% female; Age Mean  = 21.53) to examine how an extensive net of country-level variables in economic status (e.g., Human Development Index), social relations (e.g., gender equality), political orientations (e.g., democracy), and cultural values (e.g., embeddedness) relate to country-level rates of the Dark Triad traits, as well as variance in the magnitude of sex differences in them., Results: Narcissism was especially sensitive to country-level variables. Countries with more embedded and hierarchical cultural systems were more narcissistic. Also, sex differences in narcissism were larger in more developed societies: Women were less likely to be narcissistic in developed (vs. less developed) countries., Conclusions: We discuss the results based on evolutionary and social role models of personality and sex differences. That higher country-level narcissism was more common in less developed countries, whereas sex differences in narcissism were larger in more developed countries, is more consistent with evolutionary than social role models., (© 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

This article reviews the relationship between people's perceptions of unfairness and their tendencies to think, feel, and act in radicalizing ways. Various theories of radicalization processes are reviewed that examine key aspects of the psychology of perceived unfairness. The review shows that experienced group deprivation and perceived immorality are among the core judgments that can drive Muslim radicalization, right-wing radicalization, and left-wing radicalization. Symbols of injustice, the legitimization of revolutionary thought, and the experience of unfair treatment can also increase radicalization. The review also examines core moderators (e.g., uncertainty and insufficient self-correction) and mediators (e.g., externally oriented emotions) of the linkage between perceived unfairness and core components of radicalization (e.g., rigidity of thoughts, hot-cognitive defense of cultural worldviews, and violent rejection of democratic principles and the rule of law). The review discusses how the study of unfairness and radicalization contributes to a robust and meaningful science of psychology.

The present research investigated the effect of self-uncertainty salience on self-esteem striving, as well as the corresponding self-regulatory processes. Inspired by uncertainty management and meaning maintenance models, we conducted an electroencephalogram experiment to examine how self-uncertainty salience affects performance on self-esteem related tasks, and how it affects neurophysiological activity related to performance monitoring (e.g., error-related negativity, error positivity) on those tasks. Results showed that when self-uncertainty was salient, participants performed better on a task that was high (but not low) in self-esteem relevance, and these participants also displayed a larger amplitude of error positivity after error commissions, which is considered a manifestation of heightened performance monitoring. Overall, these results suggest that self-uncertainty salience increases the need and efforts for self-esteem striving. Further implications are discussed in terms of meaning compensation and self-uncertainty management., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

This paper argues that being in the Asch situation, where there is a felt need to conform to others' faulty behaviors, poses a social threat to people. Furthermore, participating in a psychology experiment in which you will have to interact with other participants might trigger sense-making processes. The paper proposes that these assumed threats or sense-making processes are likely to activate the behavioral inhibition system, making people respond in more inhibited ways than they normally would be inclined to do. As a result, people's tendency to affiliate behaviorally with persons who are similar to them can be inhibited. The implication is that lowering behavioral inhibition (by experimentally reminding people about having acted without behavioral inhibitions) should lead to more public conformity in the Asch situation and stronger behavioral affiliation with ingroup members than not being reminded about behavioral disinhibition. Findings of four experiments support this line of reasoning. These findings are discussed in terms of behavioral inhibition and behavioral affiliation. Alternative accounts of the data that focus on social belongingness threats and optimal distinctiveness are also considered.

Reactions to decisions are shaped by both outcome and procedural fairness. Moreover, outcome and procedural fairness interact to influence beliefs and behaviors. However, different types of "process/outcome" interaction effects have emerged. Many studies have shown that people react particularly negatively when they receive unfair or unfavorable outcomes accompanied by unfair procedures (the "low-low" interactive pattern). However, others find that people react especially positively when they receive fair or favorable outcomes accompanied by fair procedures (the "high-high" interactive pattern). We propose that trust in decision-making authorities dictates the form of the process/outcome interaction. Across three studies, when trust was high, the "low-low" interactive pattern emerged. When trust was low, the "high-high" interactive pattern emerged. The findings suggest that when people's experience of outcome and procedural fairness diverged from how they expected to be treated, they reacted in the direction of their experiences; otherwise, their reactions were consistent with their expectations., (© 2014 by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.)

People's just world beliefs are related to how they feel and behave towards others: the stronger people hold beliefs that the world treats them fairly, the more they feel and act pro-socially towards others. It is conceivable, therefore, that pro-social feelings and behaviours towards others can strengthen people's personal belief in a just world, especially when people expect these positive feelings to be returned. Because mimicry enhances pro-social feelings towards others, we argue that mimicry may strengthen peoples' personal just world beliefs via positive feelings for the mimicked person and the expectation that these positive feelings are returned. Moreover, we expect these effects to be more pronounced for men because men have stronger reciprocity beliefs than women. The results of three studies supported this line of reasoning, showing that mimicry made men believe more strongly that the world is personally just to them. Further support for our line of reasoning was obtained by positive feelings for the (non)mimicked person (Study 2) and reciprocity beliefs (Study 3) mediating the effects. Taken together, the findings suggest that mimicry makes men view the world as more just., (© 2011 The British Psychological Society.)

The emotion of disgust can influence people's moral judgments, even if this emotion objectively is unrelated to the moral judgment in question. The present work demonstrates that attentional control regulates this effect. In three studies, disgust was induced. In an unrelated part of the studies, participants then judged a moral transgression. Disgust resulted in more severe moral judgments when attentional control (either measured by means of individual predisposition or manipulated with experimental control) was weak as opposed to strong (Studies 1-3). Findings further showed that attentional control mediated the positive relation between the intensity of participants' disgust responses and the severity of their moral judgments (Study 2). Moreover, attentional control has its effects through the regulation of affective processing (Study 3). Taken together, the findings suggest that unrelated influences of disgust on moral judgments are contingent on the attention system.

People are often encouraged to focus on the future and strive for long-term goals. This noted, the authors argue that this future orientation is associated with intolerance of personal uncertainty, as people usually cannot be certain that their efforts will pay off. To be able to tolerate personal uncertainty, people adhere strongly to the belief in a just world, paradoxically resulting in harsher reactions toward innocent victims. In three experiments, the authors show that a future orientation indeed leads to more negative evaluations of an innocent victim (Study 1), enhances intolerance of personal uncertainty (Study 2), and that experiencing personal uncertainty leads to more negative evaluations of a victim (Study 3). So, while a future orientation enables people to strive for long-term goals, it also leads them to be harsher toward innocent victims. One underlying mechanism causing these reactions is intolerance of personal uncertainty, associated with a future orientation.

This article focuses on social situations in which people are surprised about what is happening and inhibited about how to respond to the situation at hand. We study these situations by examining a classic topic in social psychology: how people respond to receiving better outcomes than are deserved. In these situations, the actions of an authority or a coworker push in the direction of accepting and enjoying the unfair outcome, whereas personal values for most people push in the direction of rejecting or being displeased with the outcome. This conflict may inhibit people's response to the advantageous but unfair outcomes. If people are indeed inhibited about how to respond to these kinds of outcomes, then lowering behavioral inhibition by reminding people of having acted in the past without inhibitions (in a manner that is unrelated to the outcomes participants subsequently receive) should affect reactions to the outcomes. Specifically, we hypothesize that because many people are prosocial and want to adhere to principles of fairness, reminders of behavioral disinhibition will lead to less pleasure with the unfairly obtained outcomes. The results of 8 experiments (conducted both inside and outside the psychology laboratory) revealed evidence for this benign disinhibition effect on various reactions to outcomes that are better than deserved. In further accordance with our line of reasoning, the effect is particularly pronounced among those who adhere to a prosocial orientation or who have adopted a prosocial mindset and is not observed among those with proself orientations or mindsets., (2011 APA, all rights reserved)

The concept of an ability to make choices and to determine one's own outcomes fits well with experiences that most people have, and these experiences form the basis for beliefs in free will. However, the existence of conscious free will is challenged by modern research findings highlighting the unconscious origins of goal-directed behavior that gives rise to free-will beliefs. This report expands on these insights by revealing that both conscious and unconscious processes play an important role in free-will beliefs. Specifically, Experiment 1 demonstrates that free-will beliefs are strengthened when conscious intentions to produce action outcomes bind the perception of action and outcome together in time. Experiment 2 shows that these beliefs are strengthened when unconscious priming of action outcomes creates illusory experiences of self-agency when the primed outcomes occur. Together, these findings suggest that beliefs in free will are associated with self-agency and are enhanced by both conscious and unconscious information processing of goal-directed behavior.

Procedural justice concerns play a critical role in economic settings, politics, and other domains of human life. Despite the vast evidence corroborating their relevance, considerably less is known about how procedural justice judgments are formed. Whereas earlier theorizing focused on the systematic integration of content information, the present contribution provides a new perspective on the formation of justice judgments by examining the influence of accessibility experiences. Specifically, we hypothesize that procedural justice judgments may be formed based on the ease or difficulty with which justice-relevant information comes to mind. Three experiments corroborate this prediction in that procedures were evaluated less positively when the retrieval of associated unfair aspects was easy compared to difficult. Presumably this is because when it feels easy (difficult) to retrieve unfair aspects, these are perceived as frequent (infrequent), and hence the procedure as unjust (just). In addition to demonstrating that ease-of-retrieval may influence justice judgments, the studies further revealed that reliance on accessibility experiences is high in conditions of personal certainty. We suggest that this is because personal uncertainty fosters systematic processing of content information, whereas personal certainty may invite less taxing judgmental strategies such as reliance on ease-of-retrieval.

In this article, we examine the hypothesis that in masculine cultures or in other contexts that emphasize competitive achievement, those with higher performance capabilities will feel empowered to have input in decisions and, hence, will desire opportunities to voice their opinions about decisions to be made. In contrast, in more feminine cultures or in other contexts that value the importance of nurturing people with lower capability, those with lower capabilities will feel valued as important group members, will feel worthy of receiving voice and, hence, will appreciate voice opportunities. We provide evidence for these predictions in 2 studies, 1 conducted in the United States (a more masculine culture) and 1 in the Netherlands (a more feminine culture). Evidence also comes from experimental conditions in both studies, in which we made salient to participants countercultural norms and values, that is, nurturing the less capable in the United States and competitive achievement in the Netherlands. Implications for the psychology of voice and cross-cultural research are discussed.

Background: It has been shown that fairness perceptions have a strong impact on health, especially under conditions of great work stress. The aim of this study was to extend previous research in studying whether working in high justice workplace would protect from health effects following environmental stressors outside work., Methods: Using a prospective longitudinal design, the relationships between organisational justice and sickness-related absences both before and after a major life event among 25 459 public sector employees working in 2551 work units were studied. Sickness absences covered the period from 36 months before the event until 30 months after the event., Results: The increase in sickness absences after the event was larger and stayed at a higher level even 30 months after the event, among those who perceived the management practices in their work unit to be relatively unfair. Similar patterns were found for each of the distributive, procedural and interactional dimensions of organisational justice., Conclusions: Fair organisational and managerial procedures may buffer the negative health effects of psychosocial health risks outside work.

A longitudinal three-wave study among a large representative sample of 1519 employees of various companies in The Netherlands examined how organizational justice (as measured by distributive and procedural justice) was related to depressive symptoms and sickness absence. It was predicted that perceived justice would contribute to lower depressive symptoms and sickness absence, whereas depressive symptoms and absenteeism in turn would contribute to lower perceptions of organizational justice. In line with the predictions, we found that both distributive and procedural justice contributed to lower depressive symptoms, and distributive justice contributed to lower sickness absence in the following year. With regard to reversed effects, sickness absence contributed to lower perceptions of distributive justice to some extent. Moreover, sickness absence was related to higher depressive symptoms a year later. This research shows the importance of justice in organizations as a means to enhance the wellbeing of people at work and to prevent absenteeism., (Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

This article reveals how people strategically use justice assertions when attempting to persuade others. In three studies participants communicated about a negative situation they or someone else had experienced and did so in a persuasive manner (Studies 1-3), an accurate manner (Study 1), by asking for an opinion (Study 2), or without a communication goal (Studies 1 and 3). Communicators who had a persuasion goal used more justice-related words than communicators who had a goal to be accurate, asked for an opinion, or had no goal. This was particularly the case when communications were about someone else rather than the participants themselves and for those high in self-monitoring whose identities were known (vs. anonymous). The article concludes that people use justice-related words in attempts to persuade others, but only when they know there is no doubt about their personal involvement. Implications are discussed.

This article examines why people may blame innocent victims of robbery or sexual assault. We propose that in experiential mind-sets associative links are formed between the victim and the negative event. As the creation of such links is independent of explicit beliefs, people in experiential mind-sets produce negative reactions to the victim independent of their just-world beliefs. Rationalistic mind-sets, however, instigate propositional and consistency-based reasoning. For people who strongly endorse just-world beliefs (such as people who have strong predispositions to believe that the world is just or whose just-world beliefs have been threatened strongly), learning about an innocent victim creates a logically inconsistent system of beliefs. This inconsistency can be resolved by blaming the victim. For people who only weakly endorse just-world beliefs, there is no inconsistency in the first place and therefore no need to blame the victim. Two experiments support this line of reasoning.

This study investigated the impact of self-construal levels on people's tendency to blame innocent victims for the victims' fates. The authors hypothesized that when the belief in a just world is threatened, social self-construal is associated with more victim blaming than individual self-construal is. In Experiments 1 and 2, participants were primed with either the individual self (with the word I) or the social self (with the word we). Results indeed showed that when threats to just-world beliefs were high, social self-activation produced more victim blaming than individual self-activation did. This effect was not found when just-world threats were low. Extending on these findings, Experiment 3 revealed that, following a just-world threat, an independent self-construal measure was negatively related to victim blaming, and an interdependent self-construal measure was positively related to victim blaming. It is concluded that self-construal levels are important to understanding the justice motive.

We examined whether the combination of uncertainty (lack of work-time control, and negative changes at work) and organizational justice (i.e., justice of decision-making procedures and interpersonal treatment at work) contributes to sickness absence. A total of 7083 male and 24,317 female Finnish public sector employees completed questionnaires designed to assess organizational justice, workload and other factors. Hierarchical regression showed that after adjustment for age, income, and health behaviors low procedural and interactional justice were related to long sickness absence spells. In accordance with the uncertainty management model, these associations were dependent on experienced work-time control and perceived changes at work.

The authors focus on the relation between group membership and procedural justice. They argue that whether people are socially included or excluded by their peers influences their reactions to unrelated experiences of procedural justice. Findings from 2 experiments corroborate the prediction that reactions to voice as opposed to no-voice procedures are affected more strongly when people are included in a group than when they are excluded from a group. These findings are extended with a 3rd experiment that shows that people who generally experience higher levels of inclusion in their lives respond more strongly to voice as opposed to no-voice procedures. It is concluded that people's reactions to procedural justice are moderated by people's level of inclusion in social groups., (Copyright 2004 American Psychological Association)

In this article on fairness heuristic theory, we point out some important flaws in Arnadóttir's (2002) claim that fairness heuristic theory is "not empirical," by which Arnadóttir meant that theory's predictions are knowable a priori, and are not contingent upon circumstances. To this end, we demonstrate that empirically testing effects predicted by fairness heuristic theory was and is important because this showed that the theory's propositions are not necessarily knowable a priori and are contingent upon circumstances. This implies that, according to Arnadóttir's definition, fairness heuristic theory clearly is an empirical framework. It would have been helpful if Arnadóttir had studied the fairness literature more thoroughly (as this would have easily revealed fairness heuristic theory to be not knowable a priori and to be contingent upon circumstances) and also if she had pointed out which of our studies fail to follow her line of reasoning. Our reply was written not as an attempt to defend fairness heuristic theory as we applaud, indeed are honored by, attempts to scrutinize our work in progress. Our only aim here was to point at some important flaws in the Arnadóttir article, because we think these will hamper rather than advance the science of psychology of justice.