<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Vermunt, R.</title>
    <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/14619/</link>
    <description>List of Publications</description>
    <language>en</language>
    
    <item>
      <title>Self-Esteem and Outcome Fairness: Differential Importance of Procedural and Outcome Considerations (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/12195/</link>
      <pubDate>2001-08-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Results of a survey of 222 detainees in Dutch jails and police stations showed that outcome-fairness judgments of individuals with high self-esteem were more strongly related to outcome considerations than to procedural considerations, whereas outcome-fairness judgments of individuals with low self-esteem were more strongly related to procedural considerations than to outcome considerations. It was proposed that these differences were due to the fact that (a) procedures more strongly express a social evaluation than outcomes and (b) individuals with low self-esteem are more concerned with social evaluations than individuals with high self-esteem. The implications of the results for other individual-differences factors and other populations than detainees are discussed.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Relational Considerations in the Use of Influence Tactics (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/12217/</link>
      <pubDate>1999-04-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>It is proposed that the existing relationship between the influencing agent and the target of influence plays a central role in the choice of using hard and soft influence tactics. In a field study, 3 key aspects of the relation between agent and target were examined, and the results generally supported our hypotheses. First, the more unfairly people felt they were treated, the more often they wielded influence, especially using harder influence tactics. Second, the better the influencing agent liked the target, the relatively less often he or she used hard tactics. Finally, the more the influencing agent felt dependent upon the target, the fewer influence tactics, both hard and soft, were used. The discussion focuses on both the practical and theoretical implications of these findings.</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>