The formation of justice judgments appears to be affected by both outcomes and procedures. Early researchers found that verdicts were judged as fair in a situation when the litigants perceived they had some influence on the final court decision. Findings of survey research on the relationship between procedural and distributive justice suggested that procedural justice might be more important. Studies in court settings, of police-citizen encounters, and in organizations showed that procedural justice variables explained more variance in justice judgments than did outcome justice variables. The psychological mechanism of procedural justice judgments, originally thought to be a need for control, is now assumed to be a need to maintain harmonious interpersonal relations. The interaction between distributive and procedural justice is unclear. Because of the growing interest in the relationship between distributive and procedural fairness, issues regarding the distinction between the two domains become more and more important. References