On the Psychology of the Uncertain Self and the Integration of the Worldview Defense Zoo

In this paper, I focus on two issues raised against the uncertainty management model that I proposed. The first issue has to do with the need for deeper insight into psychological processes instigated by uncertainty concerns, including the possibility of positive responses to uncertainty. The second issue revolves around the question to what extent uncertainty management is the core motive (vs. a core motive) of worldview defense and sense-making. By discussing these two issues, I hope to (a) make my view on uncertainty management processes clearer, (b) note explicitly that I was advocating a core motive of worldview defense (not the core motive), and (c) propose a research agenda for future research. I end the article with a plea for research studies that focus on moderators of worldview defense motives. These moderator studies may help to integrate the large variety of core motives proposed in the literature to underlie worldview defense strategies.     

Justice and the human alarm system: The impact of exclamation points and flashing lights on the justice judgment process

Extending theory within the justice domain and work on the human alarm system, the current paper argues that the process by which justice judgments are formed may be influenced reliably by the activation of psychological systems that people use to detect and handle alarming situations. Building on this analysis, it is further proposed that if this line of reasoning is true then presenting alarm-related stimuli, such as exclamation points and flashing lights, to people should lead to more extreme judgments about subsequent justice-related events than not presenting these alarming stimuli. Findings collected using different experimental paradigms provide evidence supporting these predictions both inside and outside the psychology lab. Implications for the social psychology of justice and the human alarm system literature are discussed.     

An enquiry concerning the principles of cultural norms and values: The impact of uncertainty and mortality salience on reactions to violations and bolstering of cultural worldviews

This enquiry concerning the principles of cultural norms and values focuses on the impact of mortality and uncertainty salience on people’s reactions to events that violate or bolster their cultural norms and values. Five experiments show that both mortality and uncertainty salience influence people’s reactions to violations and bolstering of their cultural worldviews, yielding evidence for both terror and uncertainty management theories. Interestingly, the five experiments consistently reveal that uncertainty salience has a bigger impact on people’s reactions than mortality salience, suggesting that the former may be a more important antecedent of reactions to norms and values than the latter. Findings further suggest that uncertainty salience did not instigate death-thoughts whereas reactions to norms and values were stronger among mortality salient participants who thought of uncertainty as a result of the mortality salience manipulation than mortality salient participants who did not think of uncertainty following this manipulation. Implications are discussed.     

Attitudes toward illegal immigration: a cross-national methodological comparison

This research is an examination of the generalizability of a Likert-type scale originally devised to measure attitudes toward illegal immigrants (IA) in the United States. The current authors administered this scale across 4 national samples using several methodological procedures. Undergraduate students (631) responded to the IA scale (R. Ommundsen & K. S. Larsen, 1997) at the University of Oslo, Oregon State University, the University of Copenhagen, and Vrije University of Amsterdam. The authors' main purpose was to evaluate the adequacy of the 20-item IA scale by examining possible problems with method and translation. A translation study carried out with the Danish, Norwegian, and Dutch samples (N = 299) showed that the various national versions were fairly accurate and contained largely the same meanings. The use of procrustes analysis of the IA scale yielded 3 factors in all 4 national samples. The coefficient of congruence of these 3 orthogonally rotated factor matrices, with the U.S. factor matrix as target, varied from .80 to .95, supporting the cross-national robustness of the scale. In the search for a more economical cumulative scale, a Mokken analysis yielded a 5-item scale that represented the aforementioned 3 factors and was stable across national samples.     

Competitive Memory Training (COMET) for Panic and Applied Relaxation (AR) Are Equally Effective in the Treatment of Panic in Panic-Disordered Patients

While various psychological interventions, among them Applied Relaxation (AR), are effective in treating patients with panic disorder, there is still room for improvement. Competitive Memory Training (COMET) is a transdiagnostic intervention, slightly different variants of which have proven to be successful in several psychopathological conditions in different patient populations. The objective of this study is to compare the effectiveness of COMET for panic disorder with AR in a group of panic-disordered patients (with or without agoraphobia) in a routine clinical setting. A total of 143 panic-disordered patients were randomized over two (group) treatment conditions: seven sessions of AR, or seven sessions of COMET. Measurements were made at pre- and post intervention. Both treatments resulted in significant amelioration of panic and phobic symptoms; this beneficial effect was relatively large for the primary outcome measure. However, there were no significant differences between the two treatments for any of the outcome measures. COMET and AR appear to be equally effective in treating panic in panic-disordered patients.     

Procedural justice and status: status salience as antecedent of procedural fairness effects

The current article explores status as an antecedent of procedural fairness effects (the findings that perceived procedural fairness affects people's reactions, e.g., their relational judgments). On the basis of the literature, the authors proposed that salience of the general concept of status leads people to be more attentive to procedural fairness information and that, as a consequence, stronger procedural fairness effects should be found. In correspondence with this hypothesis, Experiment 1 showed stronger procedural fairness effects on people's relational treatment evaluations in a status salient condition compared with a control condition. Experiment 2 replicated this effect and, in further correspondence with the hypothesis, showed that status salience led to increased cognitive accessibility of fairness concerns. Implications for the psychology of procedural justice are discussed.