Do just world believers process unfair authoritative decisions differently?

This experiment examined whether the frequently observed interactive effect of outcome favorability or fairness and procedural desirability or fairness on perceptions of and reactions to decisions of authorities might be the consequence of people's need to believe in a just world. One hundred and twenty-one business students participated in an in-basket simulation that closely resembled a work organisation. Independent of the in-basket exercise, participants were asked about their just world belief. As expected, the findings indicate that only among those who strongly believe in a just world, a Favorable outcome can decrease people's perception of injustice caused by a biased procedure and an unbiased procedure can decrease people's perception of injustice caused by an unfavorable outcome. In addition, both strong and weak believers reported more anger when the outcome was unfavorable than when it was favorable. But only among those with a strong just world belief, a biased procedure led to more anger than an unbiased procedure. We did not find interactive effects on aggressive voice (i.e. protest behavior).