Cited by 913Social and Intergroup PsychologySocial Power and Status DynamicsJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior

Uncertainty management by means of fairness judgments

Open access
van den Bos, Kees, Lind, E. Allan·2002·Advances in Experimental Social Psychology

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0065-2601(02)80003-x

Cites

221 of 221 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van den Bos, K., & Lind, E. A.
Affiliations
Duke University (US)
Venue
Advances in Experimental Social Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier
Published
2002
Pages
1-60
ISSN
0065-2601 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1495078598
Cited by
913
References
221
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 57 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 38 · 2018: 77 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 53 · 2015: 30 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 49 · 2012: 45
FWCI
103.73
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Advances in experimental social psychology (publishedVersion)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Keywords
fairness judgments, uncertainty, coping with uncertainty, perceived fairness, heuristic processing, organizational justice, job insecurity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review