Abalakina-Paap, M., Stephan, W. G., Craig, T., & Gregory, L. (1999). Beliefs in conspiracies. Political Psychology, 20, 637–647.Google Scholar

Abelson, R. P. (1963). Computer simulation of “hot cognitions.” In Tomkins, S. S. & Messick, S. (Eds.), Computer simulation and personality: Frontier of psychological theory (pp. 277–298). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In Berkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267–299). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Adolphs, R., Tranel, D., & Damasio, A. R. (1998). The human amygdala in social judgment. Nature, 393 , 470–474.Google Scholar

Albarracin, D., Albarracin, J., Chan, M.-p. S., & Hall Jamieson, K. (2021). Creating conspiracy theories: How our thoughts are shaped. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Albright, M. (2018). Fascism: A warning. London: William Collins.Google Scholar

Alesina, A., & La Ferrera, E. (2002). Who trusts others? Journal of Public Economics, 85, 207–234.Google Scholar

Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar

Allport, G. W. (1968). The historical background of modern social psychology. In Lindzey, G. & Aronson, E. (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 1–80). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar

Allport, G. W. (1985). The historical background of social psychology. In Lindzey, G. & Aronson, E. (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (3rd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 1–46). New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar

Ansems, L. F. M., Van den Bos, K., & Mak, E. (2020). Speaking of justice: A qualitative interview study on perceived procedural justice among defendants in criminal cases. Law and Society Review, 54, 643–679.Google Scholar

Ansems, L. F. M., Van den Bos, K., & Mak, E. (2021). The importance of perceived procedural justice among defendants with a non-Western background involved in Dutch criminal cases. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 5382.Google Scholar

Aquino, K., Tripp, T. M., & Bies, R. J. (2006). Getting even or move on? Power, procedural justice, and types of offense as predictors of revenge, forgiveness, reconciliation, and avoidance in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 653–668.Google Scholar

Aronson, E. (1972). The social animal. New York: Viking Press.Google Scholar

Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., & Akert, R. M. (2013). Social psychology (8th ed., international edition). Harlow: Pearson.Google Scholar

Bal, M., & Van den Bos, K. (2010). The role of perpetrator similarity in reactions toward innocent victims. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 957–969.Google Scholar

Bal, M., & Van den Bos, K. (2012). Blaming for a better future: Future orientation and associated intolerance of personal uncertainty lead to harsher reactions toward innocent victims. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 835–844.Google Scholar

Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2013). Blind spot: Hidden biases of good people. New York: Delacorte.Google Scholar

Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 193–209.Google Scholar

Baumeister, R. F., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5, 323–370.Google Scholar

Baumeister, R. F., Twenge, J. M., & Nuss, C. K. (2002). Effects of social exclusion on cognitive processes: Anticipated aloneness reduces intelligent thought. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 817–827.Google Scholar

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497–529.Google Scholar

Beauchamp, T. L. (2001). Philosophical ethics: An introduction to moral philosophy (3rd ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Becker, E. (1973). The denial of death. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar

Bednara, J. (2021). Polarization, diversity, and democratic robustness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118, e2113843118.Google Scholar

Begeny, C. T., Huo, Y. J., Smith, H. J., & Ryan, M. K. (2021). Being treated fairly in groups is important, but not sufficient: The role of distinctive treatment in groups, and its implications for mental health. PLoS ONE, 16, e0251871.Google Scholar

Berkowitz, L. (1993). Aggression: Its causes, consequences, and control. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Bies, R. J. (2005). Are procedural and interactional justice conceptually distinct? In Greenberg, J. & Colquitt, J. A. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational justice: Fundamental questions about fairness in the workplace (pp. 85–112). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Bies, R. J. (2015). Interactional justice: Looking backward, looking forward. In Cropanzano, R. S. & Ambrose, M. L. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of justice in work organizations (pp. 89–107). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. S. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. In Lewicki, R., Sheppard, B. H., & Bazerman, M. H. (Eds.), Research on negotiation in organizations (pp. 43–55). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar

Bies, R. J., & Shapiro, D. L. (1987). Interactional fairness judgments: The influence of causal accounts. Social Justice Research, 1, 199–218.Google Scholar

Bies, R. J., & Tripp, T. M. (2001). A passion for justice: The rationality and morality of revenge. In Cropanzano, R. (Ed.), Justice in the workplace, Volume 2: From theory to practice (pp. 197–208). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Binnendyk, J., & Pennycook, G. (2022). Intuition, reason, and conspiracy beliefs. Current Opinion in Psychology, 47, 101387.Google Scholar

Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar

Bost, P. R., & Prunier, S. G. (2013). Rationality in conspiracy beliefs: The role of perceived motive. Psychological Reports, 113, 118–128.Google Scholar

Boudrias, J. S., Brunet, L., Morin, A. J. S., Savoie, A., Plunier, P., & Cacciatore, G. (2010). Empowering employees: The moderating role of perceived organisational climate and justice. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 42, 201–211.Google Scholar

Bovens, M., & Wille, A. (2011). Politiek vertrouwen in Nederland: Tijdelijke dip of definitieve daling? In Andeweg, R. & Thomassen, J. (Eds.), Democratie doorgelicht: Het functioneren van de Nederlandse democratie (pp. 21–43). Leiden: Leiden University Press.Google Scholar

Bradford, B. (2011). Voice, neutrality and respect: Use of victim support services, procedural fairness and confidence in the criminal justice system. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 11, 345–366.Google Scholar

Braley, A., Lenz, G., Adjodah, D., Rahnama, H., & Pentland, A. (2022). The subversion dilemma: Why voters who cherish democracy participate in democratic backsliding. Manuscript submitted for publication. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1766479/v1.Google Scholar

Brehm, J., & Rahn, W. (1997). Individual-level evidence for the causes and consequences of social capital. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 999–1024.Google Scholar

Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 475–482.Google Scholar

Brimbal, L., Bradford, B., Jackson, J., Hartwig, M., & Joseph, E. (2020). On the importance of a procedurally fair organizational climate for openness to change in law enforcement. Law and Human Behavior, 44, 394–411.Google Scholar

Brockner, J. (1990). Scope of justice in the workplace: How survivors react to co-worker layoffs. Journal of Social Issues, 46, 95–106.Google Scholar

Brockner, J. (1994). Perceived fairness and survivors’ reactions to layoffs, or how downsizing organizations can do well by doing good. Social Justice Research, 7, 345–363.Google Scholar

Brockner, J. (2002). Making sense of procedural fairness: High procedural fairness can reduce or heighten the influence of outcome favorability. Academy of Management Review, 27, 58–76.Google Scholar

Brockner, J. (2010). A contemporary look at organizational justice: Multiplying insult times injury. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Brockner, J. (2016). The process matters: Engaging and equipping people for success. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Brockner, J., Ackerman, G., Greenberg, J., Gelfand, M. J., Fransesco, A. M., Chen, Z. X., Leung, K., Bierbrauer, G., Gómez, C., Kirkman, B. L., & Shapiro, D. L. (2001). Culture and procedural justice: The moderating influence of power distance on reactions to voice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 300–315.Google Scholar

Brockner, J., De Cremer, D., Fishman, A. Y., & Spiegel, S. (2008). When does high procedural fairness reduce self-evaluations following unfavorable outcomes? The moderating effect of prevention focus. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 187–200.Google Scholar

Brockner, J., Heuer, L., Magner, N., Folger, R., Umphress, E., Van den Bos, K., Vermunt, R., Magner, M., & Siegel, P. (2003). High procedural fairness heightens the effect of outcome favorability on self-evaluations: An attributional analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 91, 51–68.Google Scholar

Brockner, J., Heuer, L., Siegel, P. A., Wiesenfeld, B., Martin, C., Grover, S., Reed, T., & Bjorgvinsson, S. (1998). The moderating effect of self-esteem in reaction to voice: Converging evidence from five studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 394–407.Google Scholar

Brockner, J., & Wiesenfeld, B. M. (1996). An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions: Interactive effects of outcomes and procedures. Psychological Bulletin, 120, 189–208.Google Scholar

Brockner, J., & Wiesenfeld, B. M. (2005). How, when, and why does outcome favorability interact with procedural fairness? In Greenberg, J. & Colquitt, J. A. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational justice: Fundamental questions about fairness in the workplace (pp. 525–554). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Brower, H. H., Lester, S. W., Korsgaard, M. A., & Dineen, B. R. (2009). A closer look at trust between managers and subordinates: Understanding the effects of both trusting and being trusted on subordinate outcomes. Journal of Management, 35 , 327–347.Google Scholar

Bruder, M., Haffke, P., Neave, N., Nouripanah, N., & Imhoff, R. (2013). Measuring individual differences in generic beliefs in conspiracy theories across cultures: Conspiracy Mentality Questionnaire. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 225.Google Scholar

Brugman, D., Oskam, H., & Oosterlaken, A. (2010, May). Moral identity and the relationship between moral judgment and antisocial behavior in adolescents. Paper presented at the Second Conference of the Netherlands Society of Development Psychologists, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar

Calvert, R. (1995). Rational actors, equilibrium and social institutions. In Knight, J. & Sened, I. (Eds.), Explaining social institutions (pp. 58–60). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar

Casper, J. D., Tyler, T. R., & Fisher, B. (1988). Procedural justice in felony cases. Law and Society Review, 22 , 483–507.Google Scholar

Castaldo, S., Premazzi, K., & Zerbini, F. (2010). The meaning(s) of trust: A content analysis on the diverse conceptualizations of trust in scholarly research on business relationships. Journal of Business Ethics, 96, 657–668.Google Scholar

Čehajić-Clancy, S., & Bilewicz, M. (2021). Moral-exemplar intervention: A new paradigm for conflict resolution and intergroup reconciliation. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 30, 335–342.Google Scholar

Chater, N., & Loewenstein, G. F. (2022, March 11). The i-frame and the s-frame: How focusing on individual-level solutions has led behavioral public policy astray. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4046264.Google Scholar

Cichocka, A., Marchlewska, M., & Biddlestone, M. (2022). Why do narcissists find conspiracy theories so appealing? Current Opinion in Psychology, 47, 101386.Google Scholar

Cichocka, A., Marchlewska, M., & Golec de Zavala, A. (2016). Does self-love or self-hate predict conspiracy beliefs? Narcissism, self-esteem, and the endorsement of conspiracy theories. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7, 157–166.Google Scholar

Clayton, K., & Willer, R. (2021). Endorsements from republican politicians can increase confidence in U.S. elections. SSRN Scholarly Paper. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3961104.Google Scholar

Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P. E. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, 278–321.Google Scholar

Coleman, P. T. (2021). The way out: How to overcome toxic polarization. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 386–400.Google Scholar

Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., & Ng, K. Y. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 425–445.Google Scholar

Colquitt, J. A., Greenberg, J., & Scott, B. A. (2005). Organizational justice: Where do we stand? In Greenberg, J. & Colquitt, J. A. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational justice: Fundamental questions about fairness in the workplace (pp. 589–619). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Colquitt, J. A., Noe, R. A., & Jackson, C. L. (2002). Justice in teams: Antecedents and consequences of procedural justice climate. Personnel Psychology, 55, 83–109.Google Scholar

Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92 , 909–927.Google Scholar

Crimston, D., Bain, P. G., Hornsey, M. J., & Bastian, B. (2016). Moral expansiveness: Examining variability in the extension of the moral world. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111, 636–653.Google Scholar

Crisp, R. J., & Turner, R. N. (2012). The imagined contact hypothesis. In Olson, J. M. & Zanna, M. P. (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 46, pp. 125–182). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Cropanzano, R. S., & Ambrose, M. L. (2001). Procedural and distributive justice are more similar than you think: A monistic perspective and a research agenda. In Greenberg, J. & Cropanzano, R. (Eds.), Advances in organizational behavior (pp. 119–151). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Cropanzano, R. S., & Ambrose, M. L. (2015). Organizational justice: Where we have been and where we are going. In Cropanzano, R. S. & Ambrose, M. L. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of justice in work organizations (pp. 3–13). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Cropanzano, R. S., Bowen, D. E., & Gilliland, S. W. (2007). The management of organizational justice. Academy of Management Perspectives, 21, 34–48.Google Scholar

Cropanzano, R. S., Goldman, B., & Folger, R. (2003). Deontic justice: The role of moral principles in workplace fairness. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 1019–1024.Google Scholar

Cropanzano, R. S., & Greenberg, J. (1997). Progress in organizational justice: Tunneling through the maze. In Cooper, C. L. & Robertson, I. T. (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 317–372). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Cropanzano, R. S., Massaro, S., & Becker, W. J. (2017). Deontic justice and organizational neuroscience. Journal of Business Ethics, 144, 733–754.Google Scholar

Cropanzano, R. S., & Stein, J. H. (2009). Organizational justice and behavioral ethics: Promises and prospects. Business Ethics Quarterly, 19, 193–233.Google Scholar

Cropanzano, R. S., Weiss, H. M., Suckow, K., & Grandey, A. A. (2000). Doing justice to workplace emotions. In Ashkanasy, N., Hartel, C., & Zerbe, W. (Eds.), Emotions at work (pp. 49–62). Westport, CT: Quorum.Google Scholar

Dachler, H. P., & Wilpert, B. (1978). Conceptual dimensions and boundaries of participation in organizations: A critical evaluation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 1–39.Google Scholar

Dahrendorf, R. (1959). Class and class conflict in industrial society. London: Routledge & Paul.Google Scholar

Das, S., Echambadi, R., McCardle, M., & Luckett, M. (2003). The effect of interpersonal trust, need for cognition, and social loneliness on shopping, information seeking and surfing on the web. Marketing Letters, 14, 185–202.Google Scholar

De Lange, J. (2007). The impact of the Staub model on policy making in Amsterdam regarding polarization and radicalization. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 13, 361–364.Google Scholar

De Waal, F. (2005). Our inner ape: A leading primatologist explains why we are who we are. New York: Riverhead.Google Scholar

Decety, J., & Jackson, P. L. (2006). A social-neuroscience perspective on empathy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 54–58.Google Scholar

Deutsch, M. (1958). Trust and suspicion. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2 , 265–279.Google Scholar

Dogruyol, B., Alper, S., & Yilmaz, O. (2019). The five-factor model of the moral foundations theory is stable across WEIRD and non-WEIRD cultures. Personality and Individual Differences, 151 , 109547.Google Scholar

Douglas, K. M., & Sutton, R. M. (2023). What are conspiracy theories? A definitional approach to their correlates, consequences, and communication. Annual Review of Psychology, 74, 271–298.Google Scholar

Douglas, K. M., Sutton, R. M., & Cichocka, A. (2017). The psychology of conspiracy theories. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26 , 538–542.Google Scholar

Durkheim, E. (1979). Suicide: A study in sociology. New York: Free Press. (Original work published in 1897 as Le suicide: Étude de sociologie.)Google Scholar

Durkheim, E. (1982). The rules of sociological method. New York: Simon and Schuster. (Original work published in 1895 as Les règles de la méthode sociologique.)Google Scholar

Ecker, U. K. H., Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Schmid, P., Fazio, L. K., Brashier, N., Kendeou, P., Vraga, E. K., & Amazeen, M. A. (2022). The psychological drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1, 13–29.Google Scholar

Einstein, K. L., & Glick, D. M. (2015). Do I think BLS data are BS? The consequences of conspiracy theories. Political Behavior, 37, 679–701.Google Scholar

Eisenberger, N. I., & Lieberman, M. D. (2004). Why rejection hurts: A common neural alarm system for physical and social pain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 294–300.Google Scholar

Eisenberger, N. I., Lieberman, M. D., & Williams, K. D. (2003). Does rejection hurt? An fMRI study of social exclusion. Science, 302, 290–292.Google Scholar

Ellemers, N., Wilke, H. A. M., & Van Knippenberg, A. (1993). Effects of the legitimacy of low group or individual status on individual and collective status enhancement strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 766–778.Google Scholar

Ellsworth, P. C., & Mauro, R. (1998). Psychology and law. In Gilbert, D. T., Fiske, S. T., & Lindzey, G. (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 684–732). Boston: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Ely, J. H. (1980). Democracy and distrust: A theory of judicial review. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Enders, A., Farhart, C., Miller, J., Uscinski, J., Saunders, K., & Drochon, H. (in press). Are Republicans and conservatives more likely to believe conspiracy theories? Political Behavior.Google Scholar

Enders, A. M., Uscinski, J. E., Klofstad, C. A., Seelig, M. I., Wuchty, S., Murthi, M. N., Premaratne, K., & Funchion, J. R. (2021). Do conspiracy beliefs form a belief system? Examining the structure and organization of conspiracy beliefs. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 9, 255–271.Google Scholar

Estaji, M., & Zhaleh, K. (2022). The enactment of classroom justice through explicit instruction: Deciphering the changes in English as a foreign language teachers’ perceptions and practices. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 821763.Google Scholar

Etzioni, A. (2004). From empire to community. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Evans, A. M., & Krueger, J. I. (2009). The psychology (and economics) of trust. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 3, 1003–1017.Google Scholar

Fallon, R. H. Jr. (2018). Law and legitimacy in the Supreme Court. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Fernández, S., Gaviria, E., Halperin, E., Agudo, R., …, & Saguy, T. (2022). The protective effect of agency on victims of humiliation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 102, 104375.Google Scholar

Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Finkel, N. J. (2001). Not fair! The typology of commonsense unfairness. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar

Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (2008). Social cognition: From brains to culture. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Folger, R. (1977). Distributive and procedural justice: Combined impact of “voice” and improvement of experienced inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 108–119.Google Scholar

Folger, R. (Ed.). (1984). The sense of injustice: Social psychological perspectives. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar

Folger, R. (1986). Mediation, arbitration, and the psychology of procedural justice. In Lewicki, R. J., Sheppard, B. H., & Bazerman, M. H. (Eds.), Research on negotiation in organizations (pp. 57–79). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar

Folger, R. (1987). Reformulating the preconditions of resentment: A referent cognitions model. In Masters, J. C., & Smith, W. P. (Eds.), Social comparison, social justice, and relative deprivation: Theoretical, empirical, and policy perspectives (pp. 183–215). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Folger, R. (1993). Reactions to mistreatment at work. In Murnigham, K. (Ed.), Social psychology in organizations: Advances in theory and research (pp. 161–183). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Folger, R. (2001). Fairness as deonance. In Gilliland, S., Steiner, D., & Skarlicki, D. (Eds.), Theoretical and cultural perspectives on organizational justice (pp. 3–33). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishers.Google Scholar

Folger, R. (2012). Deonance: Behavioral ethics and moral obligation. In de Cremer, D. & Tenbrunsel, A. E. (Eds.), Behavioral business ethics: Ideas on an emerging field. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar

Folger, R., & Baron, R. A. (1996). Violence and hostility at work: A model of reactions to perceived injustice. In VandenBos, G. R. & Bulatao, E. Q. (Eds.), Violence on the job: Identifying risks and developing solutions (pp. 51–85). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar

Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Organizational justice and human resource management. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Folger, R., Rosenfield, D., Grove, J., & Corkran, L. (1979). Effects of “voice” and peer opinions on responses to inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 2253–2261.Google Scholar

Folger, R., & Skarlicki, D. P. (1998). When tough times make tough bosses: Managerial distancing as a function of layoff blame. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 79–87.Google Scholar

Forsyth, D. R. (1990). Group dynamics (2nd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar

Frijda, N. H. (1986). The emotions. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar

Gambetta, D. (1987). Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relations. Cambridge, MA: Oxford.Google Scholar

Garrett, R. K. (2017). The “echo chamber” distraction: Disinformation campaigns are the problem, not audience fragmentation. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 6, 370–376.Google Scholar

Gino, F., Kouchaki, M., & Galinsky, A. D. (2015). The moral virtue of authenticity: How inauthenticity produces feelings of immorality and impurity. Psychological Science, 26, 983–996.Google Scholar

Goertzel, T. (1994). Belief in conspiracy theories. Political Psychology, 15, 731–742.Google Scholar

Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist, 48, 26–34.Google Scholar

Gonsalkorale, K., & Williams, K. D. (2007). The KKK won’t let me play: Ostracism even by a despised group hurts. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 1176–1186.Google Scholar

Goold, S. D. (2002). Trust, distrust and trustworthiness: Lessons from the field. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 17, 79–81.Google Scholar

Gray, K., DiMaggio, N., Schein, C., & Kachanoff, F. (in press). The problem of purity in moral psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review.Google Scholar

Greenberg, J. (1986a). Determinants of perceived fairness of performance evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 340–342.Google Scholar

Greenberg, J. (1986b). Organizational performance appraisal procedures: What makes them fair? In Lewicki, R. J., Sheppard, B. H., & Bazerman, M. H. (Eds.), Research on negotiation in organizations (pp. 25–41). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar

Greenberg, J. (1987a). Reactions to procedural injustice in payment distributions: Do the ends justify the means? Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 55–61.Google Scholar

Greenberg, J. (1987b). Using diaries to promote procedural justice in performance appraisals. Social Justice Research, 1, 219–234.Google Scholar

Greenberg, J. (1987c). A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. Academy of Management Review, 12, 9–22.Google Scholar

Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Journal of Management, 16, 399–432.Google Scholar

Greenberg, J. (1993). Stealing in the name of justice: Informational and interpersonal moderators of theft reactions to underpayment inequity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54, 81–103.Google Scholar

Greenberg, J. (1997). A social influence model of employee theft: Beyond the fraud triangle. In Lewicki, R. J., Bies, R. J., & Sheppard, B. H. (Eds.), Research on negotiation in organizations (Vol. 6, pp. 29–52). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar

Greenberg, J. (2000). Promote procedural justice to enhance acceptance of work outcomes. In Locke, E. A. (Ed.), A handbook of principles of organizational behavior (pp. 181–195). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Greenberg, J. (2006). Losing sleep over organizational injustice: Attenuating insomniac reactions to underpayment inequity with supervisory training in interactional justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 58–69.Google Scholar

Greenberg, J., & Folger, R. (1983). Procedural justice, participation, and the fair process effect in groups and organizations. In Paulus, P. B. (Ed.), Basic group processes (pp. 235–256). New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Greenberg, J., & Lind, E. A. (2000). The pursuit of organizational justice: From conceptualization to implication to application. In Cooper, C. L. & Locke, E. A. (Eds.), I/O psychology: What we know about theory and practice (pp. 72–105). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Greene, J. D. (2005). Emotion and cognition in moral judgment: Evidence from neuroimaging. In Changeux, J. P., Damasio, A. R., Singer, W., & Christen, Y. (Eds.), Neurobiology of human values (pp. 57–66). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Greene, J. D. (2013). Moral tribes: Emotion, reason, and the gap between us and them. New York: Penguin Press.Google Scholar

Greene, J. D., Sommerville, B., Nystrom, L. E., Darley, J. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science, 293, 2105–2108.Google Scholar

Grillos, T., Zarychta, A., & Nuñez, J. N. (2021). Water scarcity and procedural justice in Honduras: Community-based management meets market-based policy. World Development, 142, 105451.Google Scholar

Grootelaar, H. A. M., & Van den Bos, K. (2018). How litigants in Dutch courtrooms come to trust judges: The role of perceived procedural justice, outcome favorability, and other socio-legal moderators. Law and Society Review, 52, 234–268.Google Scholar

Grzesiak-Feldman, M. (2013). The effect of high-anxiety situations on conspiracy thinking. Current Psychology, 32, 100–118.Google Scholar

Hafer, C. L. (2000). Investment in long-term goals and commitment to just means drive the need to believe in a just world. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1059–1073.Google Scholar

Hafer, C. L. (2002). Why we reject innocent victims. In Ross, M. & Miller, D. T. (Eds.), The justice motive in everyday life (pp. 109–126). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108, 814–834.Google Scholar

Hartman, R., Blakey, W., Womick, J., Bail, C., Finkel, E. J., Han, H., Sarrouf, J., Schroeder, J., Sheeran, P., Van Bavel, J. J., Willer, R., & Gray, K. (2022). Interventions to reduce partisan animosity. Nature Human Behavior, 6, 1194–1205.Google Scholar

Hartung, F. E. (1951). Science as an institution. Philosophy of Science, 18, 35–54.Google Scholar

Hebel-Sela, S., Hameiri, B., & Halperin, E. (in press). The vicious cycle of violent intergroup conflicts and conspiracy theories. Current Opinion in Psychology.Google Scholar

Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Heinrichs, M., Meinlschmidt, G., Wippich, W., Ehlert, U., & Hellhammer, D. H. (2004). Selective amnesic effects of oxytocin on human memory. Physiology & Behavior, 83, 31–38.Google Scholar

Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61–83.Google Scholar

Hetherington, M. J. (1998). The political relevance of political trust. American Political Science Review, 92, 791–808.Google Scholar

Hetherington, M. J. (1999). The effect of political trust on the presidential vote, 1968–96. American Political Science Review, 93 , 311–326.Google Scholar

Hirschberger, G. (in press). From individual insecurity to collective security: The group survival motivation. In Forgas, J., Crano, B., & Fiedler, K. (Eds.), The psychology of insecurity: Seeking certainty where none can be had. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, voice and loyalty: Responses to declines in firms, organizations, and states. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Hobbes, T. (1985). Leviathan. London: Penguin. (Original work published in 1651.)Google Scholar

Hodgson, G. M. (2015). On defining institutions: Rules versus equilibria. Journal of Institutional Economics, 11, 497–505.Google Scholar

Hofstadter, R. (1964). The paranoid style in American politics. Harper’s Magazine. Retrieved from https://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/the-paranoid-style-in-american-politics/.Google Scholar

Hogg, M. A. (2004). Uncertainty and extremism: Identification with high entitativity groups under conditions of uncertainty. In Yzerbyt, V., Judd, C. M., & Corneille, O. (Eds.), The psychology of group perception: Perceived variability, entitativity, and essentialism (pp. 401–418). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Hogg, M. A. (2005). Uncertainty, social identity, and ideology. In Thye, S. R. & Lawler, E. J. (Eds.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 22, pp. 203–230). New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Hogg, M. A. (2007). Uncertainty-identity theory. In Zanna, M. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 39, pp. 70–126). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Hogg, M. A. (2011). Self-uncertainty, social identity, and the solace of extremism. In Hogg, M. A. & Blaylock, D. L. (Eds.), Extremism and the psychology of uncertainty (pp. 19–35). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Hogg, M. A., Adelman, J. R., & Blagg, R. D. (2010). Religion in the face of uncertainty: An uncertainty-identity theory account of religiousness. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14, 72–83.Google Scholar

Horberg, E. J., Oveis, C., Keltner, D., & Cohen, A. B. (2009). Disgust and the moralization of purity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 963–976.Google Scholar

Hulst, L. (2017). Experimental legal studies on perceived procedural justice and trust in law and society. Doctoral dissertation, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.Google Scholar

Hume, D. (1951). A treatise of human nature. Oxford: Clarendon. (Original work published in 1739.)Google Scholar

Hume, D. (1982). Enquiries concerning human understanding and concerning the principles of morals. Oxford: Clarendon. (Original work published in 1777.)Google Scholar

Huntington, S. P. (1996). Political order in changing societies. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Huo, Y. J. (2003). Procedural justice and social regulation across group boundaries: Does subgroup identity undermine relationship-based governance? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 336–348.Google Scholar

Huo, Y. J., Smith, H. J., Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1996). Superordinate identification, subgroup identification, and justice concerns: Is separatism the problem; is assimilation the answer? Psychological Science, 7, 40–45.Google Scholar

Huo, Y. J., & Tyler, T. R. (2001). Ethnic diversity and the viability of organizations: The role of procedural justice in bridging differences. In Greenberg, J. & Cropanzano, R. (Eds.), Advances in organizational behavior (pp. 213–244). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Imhoff, R., Bertlich, T., & Frenken, M. (2022). Tearing apart the “evil” twins: A general conspiracy mentality is not the same as specific conspiracy beliefs. Current Opinion in Psychology, 46, 101349.Google Scholar

Imhoff, R., Zimmer, F., Klein, O., António, J. H. C., Babinska, M., Bangerter, A., Bilewicz, M., Blanusa, N., Bovan, K., Buzarovska, R., Cichocka, A., Delouvée, S., Douglas, K. M., Dyrendal, A., Etienne, T., Gjoneska, B., Graf, S., Gualda, E., Hirschberger, G., Kende, A., Kutiyski, Y., Krekó, P., Krouwel, A., Mari, S., Milosevic Dordevic, J., Panasiti, M. S., Pantazi, M., Petkovski, L., Porciello, G., Rabelo, A., Radu, R. N., Sava, F. A., Schepisi, M., Sutton, R. M., Swami, V., Thórisdóttir, H., Turjacanin, V., Wagner-Egger, P., Zezelj, I., & Van Prooijen, J.-W. (2022). Conspiracy mentality and political orientation across 26 countries. Nature Human Behaviour. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01258-7.Google Scholar

Insko, C. A., & Schopler, J. (1998). Differential distrust of groups and of individuals. In Sedikides, C., Schopler, J., & Insko, C. A. (Eds.), Intergroup cognition and intergroup behavior (pp. 75–107). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Jackson, P., & Delehanty, H. (2006). Sacred hoops: Spiritual lessons of a hardwood warrior. New York: Turq.Google Scholar

Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar

Janis, I. L., & Mann, L. (1977). Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar

Johnson, C. B. (1996). Distrust of science. Nature, 380, 18.Google Scholar

Jolley, D., & Douglas, K. M. (2014). The effects of antivaccine conspiracy theories on vaccination intentions. PLoS ONE, 9, e89177.Google Scholar

Jolley, D., Marques, M. D., & Cookson, D. (2022). Shining a spotlight on the dangerous consequences of conspiracy theories. Current Opinion in Psychology, 47, 101363.Google Scholar

Jolley, D., Meleady, R., & Douglas, K. M. (2020). Exposure to intergroup conspiracy theories promotes prejudice which spreads across groups. British Journal of Psychology, 111, 17–35.Google Scholar

Jost, J. T., Baldassarri, D. S., & Druckman, J. N. (2022). Cognitive-motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1, 560–576.Google Scholar

Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1–27.Google Scholar

Kagan, J. (1984). The nature of the child. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Kahn, D., Björklund, F., & Hirschberger, G. (2021). Why are our political rivals so blind to the problems facing society? Evidence that political leftists and rightists in Israel mentally construe collective threats differently. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 27, 426–435.Google Scholar

Kant, I. (1959). Foundation of the metaphysics of morals. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill. (Original work published in 1785.)Google Scholar

Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39, 1123–1134.Google Scholar

Kiesler, S., & Sproull, L. (1992). Group decision making and communication technology. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 52, 96–123.Google Scholar

Kiesler, S., Zubrow, D., Moses, A. M., & Geller, V. (1985). Affect in computer-mediated communication: An experiment in synchronous terminal-to-terminal discussion. Human-Computer Interaction, 1, 77–104.Google Scholar

Kirsch, P., Esslinger, C., Chen, Q., Mier, D., Lis, D., Siddhanti, S., Gruppe, H., Mattay, V. S., Gallhofer, B., & Meyer-Lindenberg, A. (2005). Oxytocin modulates neural circuitry for social cognition and fear in humans. The Journal of Neuroscience, 25, 11489–11493.Google Scholar

Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In Goslin, D. A. (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research (pp. 347–480). Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar

Kohlberg, L. (1971). From is to ought: How to commit the naturalistic fallacy and get away with it in the study of moral development. In Mischel, T. (Ed.), Cognitive development and epistemology (pp. 151–235). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Koper, G., Van Knippenberg, D., Bouhuijs, F., Vermunt, R., & Wilke, H. (1993). Procedural fairness and self-esteem. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 313–325.Google Scholar

Kosfeld, M., Heinrichs, M., Zak, P. J., Fischbacher, U., & Fehr, E. (2005). Oxytocin increases trust in humans. Nature, 435, 673–676.Google Scholar

Kovera, M. B., & Borgida, E. (2010). Social psychology and law. In Fiske, S. T., Gilbert, D. T., & Lindzey, G. (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (5th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 1343–1385). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar

Kramer, R. M. (1994). The sinister attribution error: Paranoid cognition and collective distrust in organizations. Motivation and Emotion, 18, 199–230.Google Scholar

Kramer, R. M. (1999). Trust and distrust in organizations: Emerging perspectives, enduring questions. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 569–598.Google Scholar

Kramer, R. M., & Cook, K. S. (2004). Trust and distrust in organizations: Dilemmas and approaches. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar

Kramer, R. M., & Isen, A. M. (1994). Trust and distrust: Its psychological and social dimensions. Motivation and Emotion, 18, 105–107.Google Scholar

Kreko, P. (in press). Escape from insecurity: Conspiracy theories and pseudoscience as a response to the pandemic. In Forgas, J., Crano, B., & Fiedler, K. (Eds.), The psychology of insecurity: Seeking certainty where none can be had. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Kret, M. E., Jaasma, L., Bionda, T., & Wijnen, J. G. (2016). Bonobos (Pan paniscus) show an attentional bias toward conspecifics’ emotions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 113, 3761–3766.Google Scholar

Kteily, N. S., & Landry, A. P. (2022). Dehumanization: Trends, insights, and challenges. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 26, 222–240.Google Scholar

Kunda, Z. (1999). Social cognition: Making sense of people. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Landry, A. P., Schooler, J. W., Willer, R., & Selic, P. (in press). Reducing explicit blatant dehumanization by correcting exaggerated meta-perceptions. Social Psychological and Personality Science.Google Scholar

Leander, N. P., Agostini, M., Stroebe, W., Kreienkamp, J., Spears, R., Kuppens, T., … & Kruglanski, A. W. (2020). Frustration-affirmation? Thwarted goals motivate compliance with social norms for violence and nonviolence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 119, 249–271.Google Scholar

Leary, M. R. (2010). Affiliation, acceptance, and belonging: The pursuit of interpersonal connection. In Fiske, S. T., Gilbert, D. T., & Lindzey, G. (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (5th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 864–897). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar

Leary, M. R., & Baumeister, R. F. (2000). The nature and function of self-esteem: Sociometer theory. In Zanna, M. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 32, pp. 1–62). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar

Lerner, M. J. (2003). The justice motive: Where social psychologists found it, how they lost it, and why they may not find it again. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 388–399.Google Scholar

Levelt, W. J. M. (2012). Falende wetenschap: De frauduleuze onderzoekspraktijken van sociaal-psycholoog Diederik Stapel [Flawed science: The fraudulent research practices of social psychologist Diederik Stapel]. Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.Google Scholar

Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Oberauer, K., Brophy, S., Lloyd, E. A., & Marriott, M. (2015). Recurrent fury: Conspiratorial discourse in the blogosphere triggered by research on the role of conspiracist ideation in climate denial. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 3, 142–178.Google Scholar

Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K. H., & Cook, J. (2017). Beyond misinformation: Understanding and coping with the “post-truth” era. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 6, 353–369.Google Scholar

Lewandowsky, S., Oberauer, K., & Gignac, G. E. (2013). NASA faked the moon landing – Therefore, (climate) science is a hoax: An anatomy of the motivated rejection of science. Psychological Science, 24, 622–633.Google Scholar

Lewin, K. (1935). A dynamic theory of personality: Selected papers. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Lewin, K. (1939). Field theory and experiment in social psychology: Concepts and methods. American Journal of Sociology, 44, 868–896.Google Scholar

Lewin, K. (1943). Psychology and the process of group living. Journal of Social Psychology, 17, 113–131.Google Scholar

Li, A., & Cropanzano, R. (2009). Fairness at the group level: Justice climate and intraunit justice climate. Journal of Management, 35, 564–599.Google Scholar

Liekefett, L., Christ, O., & Becker, J. C. (in press). Can conspiracy beliefs be beneficial? Longitudinal linkages between conspiracy beliefs, anxiety, uncertainty aversion, and existential threat. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.Google Scholar

Lind, E. A. (1992, March). The fairness heuristic: Rationality and “relationality” in procedural evaluations. Paper presented at the Fourth International Conference of the Society for the Advancement of Socio-Economics, Irvine, CA.Google Scholar

Lind, E. A. (1994). Procedural justice and culture: Evidence for ubiquitous process concerns. Zeitschrift für Rechtssoziologie, 15, 24–36.Google Scholar

Lind, E. A. (1995). Social conflict and social justice: Lessons from the social psychology of justice judgments. Inaugural address, Leiden University.Google Scholar

Lind, E. A. (2001). Fairness heuristic theory: Justice judgments as pivotal cognitions in organizational relations. In Greenberg, J. & Cropanzano, R. (Eds.), Advances in organizational behavior (pp. 56–88). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Lind, E. A., Greenberg, J., Scott, K. S., & Welchans, T. D. (2000). The winding road from employee to complainant: Situational and psychological determinants of wrongful termination claims. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 557–590.Google Scholar

Lind, E. A., Kanfer, R., & Earley, P. C. (1990). Voice, control, and procedural justice: Instrumental and noninstrumental concerns in fairness judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 952–959.Google Scholar

Lind, E. A., Kray, L., & Thompson, L. (1998). The social construction of injustice: Fairness judgments in response to own and others’ unfair treatment by authorities. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 75, 1–22.Google Scholar

Lind, E. A., Kray, L., & Thompson, L. (2001). Primacy effects in justice judgments: Testing predictions from fairness heuristic theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 85, 189–210.Google Scholar

Lind, E. A., Kulik, C. T., Ambrose, M., & De Vera Park, M. V. (1993). Individual and corporate dispute resolution: Using procedural fairness as a decision heuristic. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 224–251.Google Scholar

Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar

Lind, E. A., & Van den Bos, K. (2002). When fairness works: Toward a general theory of uncertainty management. In Staw, B. M. & Kramer, R. M. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 24, pp. 181–223). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar

Loseman, A., Miedema, J., Van den Bos, K., & Vermunt, R. (2009). Exploring how people respond to conflicts between self-interest and fairness: The influence of threats to the self on affective reactions to advantageous inequity. Australian Journal of Psychology, 61, 13–21.Google Scholar

Maddox, J. (1995). The prevalent distrust of science. Nature, 378, 435–437.Google Scholar

Marrow, A. J. (1969). The practical theorist: The life and work of Kurt Lewin. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Martin, L. L. (1999). I-D compensation theory: Some implications of trying to satisfy immediate-return needs in a delayed-return culture. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 195–208.Google Scholar

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1989). The structure of interpersonal traits: Wiggins circumplex and the 5-factor model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 586–595.Google Scholar

McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the Five-Factor Model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60, 175–215.Google Scholar

McGregor, I., Nash, K. A., & Prentice, M. (2011). Religious zeal after goal frustration. In Hogg, M. A. & Blaylock, D. L. (Eds.), Extremism and the psychology of uncertainty (pp. 147–164). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

McLean, K. (2020). Revisiting the role of distributive justice in Tyler’s legitimacy theory. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 16, 335–346.Google Scholar

McRaven, W. H. (2017). Make your bed. New York: Grand Central Publishing.Google Scholar

Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society: From the standpoint of a social behaviorist. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Messick, D. M., Wilke, H., Brewer, M. B., Kramer, R. M., Zemke, P., & Lui, L. (1983). Individual adaptations and structural changes as solutions to social dilemmas. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44 , 294–309.Google Scholar

Mikolajczak, M., Gross, J. J., Lane, A., Corneille, O., De Timary, P., & Luminet, O. (2010). Oxytocin makes people trusting, not gullible. Psychological Science, 21, 1072–1074.Google Scholar

Mikula, G., & Wenzel, M. (2000). Justice and social conflict. International Journal of Psychology, 35, 126–135.Google Scholar

Miller, D. T. (1999). The norm of self-interest. American Psychologist, 54, 1053–1060.Google Scholar

Minson, J. A., & Chen, F. S. (2022). Receptiveness to opposing views: Conceptualization and integrative review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 26, 93–111.Google Scholar

Minson, J. A., & Dorison, C. A. (in press). Why is exposure to opposing views aversive? Reconciling three theoretical perspectives. Current Opinion in Psychology.Google Scholar

Modde, J. M. (2001). Procedural fairness and noncompliance. Doctoral dissertation, Twente University.Google Scholar

Moorman, R. H. (1991). Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 845–855.Google Scholar

Moorman, R. H., & Byrne, Z. S. (2005). How does organizational justice affect organizational citizenship behavior? In Greenberg, J. & Colquitt, J. A. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational justice: Fundamental questions about fairness in the workplace (pp. 355–380). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Newton, K. (2007). Social and political trust. In Dalton, R. J. & Klingemann, H. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political behaviour (pp. 342–361). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Nikolakis, W., & Grafton, R. Q. (2014). Fairness and justice in Indigenous water allocations: Insights from Northern Australia. Water Policy, 16, 19–35.Google Scholar

Nummela, O., Sulander, T., Rahkonen, O., & Uutela, A. (2009). The effect of trust and change in trust on self-rated health: A longitudinal study among aging people. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 49 , 339–342.Google Scholar

Opotow, S. (1990). Deterring moral exclusion. Journal of Social Issues, 46, 173–182.Google Scholar

Opotow, S. (1993). Animals and the scope of justice. Journal of Social Issues, 49 (1), 71–85.Google Scholar

Opotow, S. (1994). Predicting protection: Scope of justice and the natural world. Journal of Social Issues, 50, 49–63.Google Scholar

Opotow, S. (1995). Drawing the line: Social categorization, moral exclusion, and the scope of justice. In Bunker, B. B. & Rubin, J. Z. (Eds.), Conflict, cooperation, and justice: Essays inspired by the work of Morton Deutsch (pp. 347–369). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Opotow, S. (2008). “Not so much as a place to lay our head …”: Moral inclusion and exclusion in the American civil war reconstruction. Social Justice Research, 21, 26–49.Google Scholar

Opotow, S., Gerson, J., & Woodside, S. (2005). From moral exclusion to moral inclusion: Theory for teaching peace. Theory into Practice, 44, 303–318.Google Scholar

Overheul, M., Rijnhout, R., & Van den Bos, K. (2022). Unpublished raw data.Google Scholar

Paolini, S., Harwood, J., Rubin, M., Husnu, S., Joyce, N., & Hewstone, M. (2014). Positive and extensive intergroup contact in the past buffers against the disproportionate impact of negative contact in the present. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 548–562.Google Scholar

Parks, C. D., Joireman, J., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2013). Cooperation, trust, and antagonism: How public goods are promoted. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14, 119–165.Google Scholar

Peeters, G. (1971). The positive-negative asymmetry: On cognitive consistency and positivity bias. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 455–474.Google Scholar

Pennycook, G., Bago, B., & McPhetres, J. (in press). Science beliefs, political ideology, and cognitive sophistication. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.Google Scholar

Peperkoorn, L. S., Becker, D. V., Balliet, D., Columbus, S., Molho, C., & Van Lange, P. A. (2020). The prevalence of dyads in social life. PLoS ONE, 15, e0244188.Google Scholar

Piaget, J. (1975). The moral judgment of the child. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. (Original work published in 1932.)Google Scholar

Pinker, S. (2011). The better angels of our nature: The decline of violence in history and its causes. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar

Poon, K. T., Chen, Z., & Wong, W. Y. (2020). Beliefs in conspiracy theories following ostracism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 46 , 1234–1246.Google Scholar

Popper, K. R. (1945). The open society and its enemies. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar

Rawls, J. (1992). A theory of justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Original work published in 1971.)Google Scholar

Reicher, S. D., & Haslam, S. A. (2016). Fueling extremes. Scientific American Mind, 27 (3), 34–39.Google Scholar

Robertson, C. E., Pretus, C., Rathje, S., Harris, E., & Van Bavel, J. J. (in press). How social identity shapes conspiratorial belief. Current Opinion in Psychology.Google Scholar

Robertson, G. (2013). Crimes against humanity: The struggle for global justice (4th ed.). New York: New Press.Google Scholar

Roozenbeek, J., Van der Linden, S., Goldberg, B., Rathje, S., & Lewandowsky, S. (2022). Psychological inoculation improves resilience against misinformation on social media. Science Advances, 8, eabo6254.Google Scholar

Rotter, J. B. (1980). Interpersonal trust, trustworthiness, and gullibility. American Psychologist, 35, 1–7.Google Scholar

Sargent, G. (2022, July 11). An expert in political violence urgently warns: The worst is coming. Washington Post. www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/07/11/gop-political-violence-militias-jan-6-democratic-breakdown/Google Scholar

Sassenberg, K., Winter, K., Becker, D., Ditrich, L., Scholl, A., & Moskowitz, G. B. (2022). Flexibility mindsets: Reducing biases that result from spontaneous processing. European Review of Social Psychology, 33, 171–213.Google Scholar

Schermer, M. (2004). The science of good and evil: Why people cheat, gossip, share, and follow the golden rule. New York: Times Books.Google Scholar

Schimmelpfennig, R., & Muthukrishna, M. (2022, March 14). Cultural evolutionary behavioural science in public policy. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4057679.Google Scholar

Schopler, J., & Insko, C. A. (1992). The discontinuity effect in interpersonal and intergroup relations: Generality and mediation. In Stroebe, W. & Hewstone, M. (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 121–151). Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar

Schopler, J., & Insko, C. A. (1999). The reduction of the interindividual-intergroup discontinuity effect: The role of future consequences. In Foddy, M., Smithson, M., Schneider, S., & Hogg, M. (Eds.), Resolving social dilemmas: Dynamic, structural, and intergroup aspects (pp. 281–293). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Schopler, J., Insko, C. A., Wieselquist, J., Pemberton, M., Witcher, B., Kozar, R., Roddenberry, C., & Wildschut, T. (2001). When groups are more competitive than individuals: The domain of the discontinuity effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 632–644.Google Scholar

Schul, Y., Mayo, R., & Burnstein, E. (2004). Encoding under trust and distrust: The spontaneous activation of incongruent cognitions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 668–679.Google Scholar

Schul, Y., Mayo, R., & Burnstein, E. (2008). The value of distrust. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1293–1302.Google Scholar

Schyns, P., & Koop, C. (2010). Political distrust and social capital in Europe and the USA. Social Indicators Research, 96, 145–167.Google Scholar

Sherif, M. (1958). Superordinate goals in the reduction of intergroup conflict. American Journal of Sociology, 63, 349–356.Google Scholar

Sherif, M., Harvey, O. J., White, B. J., Hood, W. R., & Sherif, C. W. (1961). Intergroup conflict and cooperation: The Robbers Cave experiment. Norman, OK: University Book Exchange.Google Scholar

Sherman, G. D., & Clore, G. L. (2009). The color of sin: White and black are perceptual symbols of moral purity and pollution. Psychological Science, 20, 1019–1025.Google Scholar

Sherman, G. D., Haidt, J., & Clore, G. L. (2012). The faintest speck of dirt: Disgust enhances the detection of impurity. Psychological Science, 23, 1506–1514.Google Scholar

Sidanius, J., Levin, S., Federico, C. M., & Pratto, F. (2001). Legitimizing ideologies: The social dominance approach. In Jost, J. T. & Major, B. (Eds.), The psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, and intergroup relations (pp. 307–331). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Smith, H. J., & Tyler, T. R. (1997). Choosing the right pond: The impact of group membership on self-esteem and group-oriented behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 146–170.Google Scholar

Smith, H. J., Tyler, T. R., Huo, Y. J., Ortiz, D. J., & Lind, E. A. (1998). The self-relevant implications of the group-value model: Group-membership, self-worth and treatment quality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 470–493.Google Scholar

Snyder, C. R., & Fromkin, H. L. (1980). Uniqueness: The human pursuit of difference. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar

Spencer, S. J., Zanna, M. P., & Fong, G. T. (2005). Establishing a causal chain: Why experiments are often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 845–851.Google Scholar

Sprinzak, E. (1991). The process of delegitimation: Towards a linkage theory of political terrorism. Terrorism and Political Violence, 3, 50–68.Google Scholar

Sprinzak, E. (1995). Right-wing terrorism in a comparative perspective: The case of split delegitimization. Terrorism and Political Violence, 7, 17–43.Google Scholar

Stanghellini, G. (2000). Vulnerability to schizophrenia and lack of common sense. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 26, 775–787.Google Scholar

Staub, E. (1989). The roots of evil: The origins of genocide and other group violence. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Staub, E. (2018). Preventing violence and promoting active bystandership and peace: My life in research and applications. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 24, 95–111.Google Scholar

Staub, E., Pearlman, L. A., Gubin, A., & Hagengimana, A. (2005). Healing, reconciliation, forgiving and the prevention of violence after genocide or mass killing: An intervention and its experimental evaluation in Rwanda. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 24, 297–334.Google Scholar

Sternisko, A., Cichocka, A., Cislak, A., & Van Bavel, J. J. (in press). National narcissism predicts the belief in and the dissemination of conspiracy theories during the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence from 56 countries. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.Google Scholar

Streeck, W., & Thelen, K. A. (Eds.). (2005). Beyond continuity: Institutional change in advanced political economies. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Suler, J. (2004). The online disinhibition effect. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 7, 321–326.Google Scholar

Sunshine, J., & Tyler, T. R. (2003). Moral solidarity, identification with the community, and the importance of procedural justice: The police as prototypical representatives of a group’s moral values. Social Psychology Quarterly, 66, 153–165.Google Scholar

Sutton, R. M., & Douglas, K. M. (in press). Rabbit Hole Syndrome: Inadvertent, accelerating, and entrenched commitment to conspiracy beliefs. Current Opinion in Psychology.Google Scholar

Sweeney, P. D., & McFarlin, D. B. (1993). Workers’ evaluations of the “ends” and the “means”: An examination of four models of distributive and procedural justice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54, 23–40.Google Scholar

Syme, G. J. (2014). Acceptable risk and social values: Struggling with uncertainty in Australian water allocation. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 28, 113–121.Google Scholar

Sztompka, P. (1999). Trust: A sociological theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Tajfel, H. (1978). Interindividual behaviour and intergroup behaviour. In Tajfel, H. (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 27–60). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Tajfel, H. (1982). Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 1–39.Google Scholar

Tajfel, H., Billig, M. G., Bundy, R. P., & Flament, C. (1971). Social categorization and intergroup behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 149–178.Google Scholar

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In Austin, W. G. & Worchel, S. (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In Worchel, S. & Austin, W. G. (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.Google Scholar

Tausch, N., Becker, J., Spears, R., Christ, O., Saab, R., Sing, P., & Siddiqui, P. (2011). Explaining radical group behavior: Developing emotion and efficacy routes to normative and non-normative collective action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101 , 129–148.Google Scholar

Tetlock, P. E. (2002). Social-functionalist frameworks for judgment and choice: The intuitive politician, theologian, and prosecutor. Psychological Review, 109, 451–472.Google Scholar

Thau, S., Aquino, K., & Wittek, R. (2007). An extension of uncertainty management theory to the self: The relationship between justice, social comparison orientation, and antisocial work behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 286–295.Google Scholar

Thau, S., Bennett, R. J., Mitchell, M. S., & Marrs, M. B. (2009). How management style moderates the relationship between abusive supervision and workplace deviance: An uncertainty management theory perspective. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108, 79–92.Google Scholar

Thayer, L. (2021). The grand challenges of psychological science. Observer of the Association for Psychological Science, December 29, 2021, www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/grand-challenges.Google Scholar

Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1978). A theory of procedure. California Law Review, 66, 541–566.Google Scholar

Thomas, W. I., & Thomas, D. S. (1928). The child in America: Behavior problems and programs. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar

Thorisdottir, H., Jost, J. T., & Kay, A. C. (2009). On the social and psychological bases of ideology and system justification. In Jost, J. T., Kay, A. C., & Thorisdottir, H. (Eds.), Social and psychological bases of ideology and system justification (pp. 3–23). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Truxillo, D. M., Bauer, T. N., Campion, M. A., & Paronto, M. E. (2006). A field study of the role of the Big Five personality in applicant perceptions of selection fairness, self, and the hiring organization. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14, 269–277.Google Scholar

Turiel, E. (1983). The development of social knowledge: Morality and convention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R. (1984). The role of perceived injustice in defendants’ evaluations of their courtroom experience. Law and Society Review, 18, 51–74.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R. (1986). Justice and leadership endorsement. In Lau, R. R. & Sears, D. O. (Eds.), Political cognitions (pp. 257–278). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R. (1987). Conditions leading to value-expressive effects in judgments of procedural justice: A test of four models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 333–344.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R. (1988). What is procedural justice? Criteria used by citizens to assess the fairness of legal procedures. Law and Society Review, 22, 103–135.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R. (1989). The psychology of procedural justice: A test of the group-value model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 830–838.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R. (1990). Justice, self-interest, and the legitimacy of legal and political authority. In Mannsbridge, J. J. (Ed.), Beyond self-interest (pp. 171–179). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R. (1997). The psychology of legitimacy: A relational perspective on voluntary deference to authorities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 323–345.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R. (1999). Why people cooperate with organizations: An identity-based perspective. In Staw, B. M. & Sutton, R. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 201–246). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R. (2006). Why people obey the law. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R. (2009). Procedural justice, identity and deference to the law: What shapes rule-following in a period of transition? Australian Journal of Psychology, 61, 32–39.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R. (2010). Legitimacy and rule adherence: A psychological perspective on the antecedents and consequences of legitimacy. In Bobocel, D. R., Kay, A. C., Zanna, M. P., & Olson, J. M. (Eds.), The psychology of justice and legitimacy: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 11, pp. 251–272). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R. (2012). Justice and effective cooperation. Social Justice Research, 25, 355–375.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R. (2013). The psychology of cooperation: Implications for public policy. In Shafir, E. (Ed.), The behavioral foundations of public policy (pp. 77–90). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., & Bies, R. J. (1990). Beyond formal procedures: The interpersonal context of procedural justice. In Caroll, J. S. (Ed.), Applied social psychology and organizational settings (pp. 77–98). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2000). Cooperation in groups: Procedural justice, social identity, and behavioral engagement. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2005). Can businesses effectively regulate employee conduct? The antecedents of rule following in work settings. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 1143–1158.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., Boeckmann, R. J., Smith, H. J., & Huo, Y. J. (1997). Social justice in a diverse society. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., & Caine, A. (1981). The influence of outcomes and procedures on satisfaction with formal leaders. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 642–655.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., Casper, J. D., & Fisher, B. (1989). Maintaining allegiance toward political authorities: The role of prior attitudes and the use of fair procedures. American Journal of Political Science, 33 , 629–652.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., & De Cremer, D. (2006). How do we promote cooperation in groups, organizations, and societies? In van Lange, P. A. M. (Ed.), Bridging social psychology: Benefits of transdisciplinary approaches (pp. 427–433). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., & DeGoey, P. (1995). Collective restraint in social dilemmas: Procedural justice and social identification effects on support for authorities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 482–497.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., & DeGoey, P. (1996). Trust in organizational authorities: The influence of motive attributions on willingness to accept decisions. In Kramer, R. & Tyler, T. R. (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 331–356). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., & Fagan, J. (2008). Legitimacy and cooperation: Why do people help the police fight crime in their communities? Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 6, 231–275.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., Goff, P. A., & MacCoun, R. J. (2015). The impact of psychological science on policing in the United States: Procedural justice, legitimacy, and effective law enforcement. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 16, 75–109.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. J. (2002). Trust in the law: Encouraging public cooperation with the police and courts. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., & Jackson, J. (2014). Popular legitimacy and the exercise of legal authority: Motivating compliance, cooperation, and engagement. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 20, 78–95.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., & Jost, J. T. (2007). Psychology and the law: Reconciling normative and descriptive accounts of social justice and system legitimacy. In Kruglanski, A. W. & Higgins, E. T. (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., pp. 807–825). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In Zanna, M. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 115–191). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., Lind, E. A., & Huo, Y. J. (2000). Cultural values and authority relations: The psychology of conflict resolution across cultures. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 6, 1138–1163.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., Lind, E. A., Ohbuchi, K.-I., Sugawara, I., & Huo, Y. J. (1998). Conflict with outsiders: Disputing within and across cultural boundaries. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 137–146.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., Rasinski, K. A., & McGraw, K. M. (1985). The influence of perceived injustice on the endorsement of political leaders. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 15, 700–725.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., Rasinski, K. A., & Spodick, N. (1985). Influence of voice on satisfaction with leaders: Exploring the meaning of process control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 72–81.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., Smith, H. J., & Huo, Y. F. (1996). Member diversity and leadership effectiveness: Procedural justice, social identity, and group dynamics. In Markovsky, B., Lovaglia, M. J., & Simon, R. (Eds.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 13, pp. 33–66). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar

Tyler, T. R., & Wakslak, C. (2004). Profiling and the legitimacy of the police: Procedural justice, attributions of motive, and the acceptance of social authority. Criminology, 42, 13–42.Google Scholar

Uh, S. (2016). The relationship between sociomoral disgust and physical disgust: Investigation of facial affect in response to purity and fairness violations. Neuroethics, 9, 139.Google Scholar

Unkelbach, C., Guastella, A. J., & Forgas, J. P. (2008). Oxytocin selectively facilitates recognition of positive sex and relationship words. Psychological Science, 19, 1092–1094.Google Scholar

Uscinski, J., Enders, A. M., Klofstad, C., & Stoler, J. (2022). Cause and effect: On the antecedents and consequences of conspiracy theory beliefs. Current Opinion in Psychology, 46, 101364.Google Scholar

Van den Bos, K. (1996). Procedural justice and conflict. Doctoral dissertation, Leiden University.Google Scholar

Van den Bos, K. (1999). What are we talking about when we talk about no-voice procedures? On the psychology of the fair outcome effect. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 560–577.Google Scholar

Van den Bos, K. (2001a). Fairness heuristic theory: Assessing the information to which people are reacting has a pivotal role in understanding organizational justice. In Gilliland, S. W., Steiner, D. D., & Skarlicki, D. P. (Eds.), Theoretical and cultural perspectives on organizational justice (pp. 63–84). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar

Van den Bos, K. (2001b). Uncertainty management: The influence of uncertainty salience on reactions to perceived procedural fairness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 931–941.Google Scholar

Van den Bos, K. (2003). On the subjective quality of social justice: The role of affect as information in the psychology of justice judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 482–498.Google Scholar

Van den Bos, K. (2005). What is responsible for the fair process effect? In Greenberg, J. & Colquitt, J. A. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational justice: Fundamental questions about fairness in the workplace (pp. 273–300). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Van den Bos, K. (2007). Hot cognition and social justice judgments: The combined influence of cognitive and affective factors on the justice judgment process. In de Cremer, D. (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of justice and affect (pp. 59–82). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar

Van den Bos, K. (2009). Making sense of life: The existential self trying to deal with personal uncertainty. Psychological Inquiry, 20, 197–217.Google Scholar

Van den Bos, K. (2011). Vertrouwen in de overheid: Wanneer hebben burgers het, wanneer hebben ze het niet, en wanneer weten ze niet of de overheid te vertrouwen is? The Hague: Netherlands Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations.Google Scholar

Van den Bos, K. (2015). Humans making sense of alarming conditions: Psychological insight into the fair process effect. In Cropanzano, R. S. & Ambrose, M. L. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of justice in work organizations (pp. 403–417). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Van den Bos, K. (2018). Why people radicalize: How unfairness judgments are used to fuel radical beliefs, extremist behaviors, and terrorism. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Van den Bos, K. (2020a). Empirical legal research: A primer. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar

Van den Bos, K. (2020b). Unfairness and radicalization. Annual Review of Psychology, 71, 563–588.Google Scholar

Van den Bos, K. (2021). Social psychology and law: Basic social psychological principles in legal contexts. In van Lange, P. A. M., Higgins, E. T., & Kruglanski, A. W. (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (3rd ed., pp. 513–531). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Van den Bos, K. (in press). Trust in social institutions: The role of informational and personal uncertainty. In Forgas, J., Fiedler, K., & Crano, B. (Eds.), The psychology of insecurity: Seeking certainty where none can be had. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Van den Bos, K., & Bal, M. (2016). Social-cognitive and motivational processes underlying the justice motive. In Sabbagh, C. & Schmitt, M. (Eds.), Handbook of social justice theory and research (pp. 181–198). New York: Springer.Google Scholar