Anderson, C. J., Blais, A., Bowler, S., Donovan, T., & Listhaug, O. (2005). Losers’ consent: Elections and democratic legitimacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Arceneaux, K. (2008). Can partisan cues diminish democratic accountability? Political Behavior,
Baird, V. A., & Gangl, A. (2006). Shattering the myth of legality: The impact of the media’s framing of Supreme Court procedures on perceptions of fairness. Political Psychology,
Banducci, S. A., & Karp, J. A. (1999). Perceptions of fairness and support for proportional representation. Political Behavior,
Birch, S. (2010). Perceptions of electoral fairness and voter turnout. Comparative Political Studies,
Conover, P. J., & Feldman, S. (1989). Candidate perception in an ambiguous world: Campaigns, cues, and inference processes. American Journal of Political Science,
Craig, S. C., Martinez, M., Gainous, J., & Kane, J. G. (2006). Winners, losers, and election context: Voter responses to the 2000 presidential election. Political Research Quarterly,
Durr, R. H., Gilmour, J. B., & Wolbrecht, C. (1997). Explaining congressional approval. American Journal of Political Science,
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Funk, C. L. (2001). Process performance: Public reaction to legislative policy debate. In J. R. Hibbing & E. Theiss-Morse (Eds.), What is it about government that Americans dislike?. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gaines, B. J., Kuklinski, J. H., Quirk, P. J., Peyton, B., & Verkuilen, J. (2007). Same facts, different interpretations: Partisan motivation and opinion on Iraq. Journal of Politics,
Gangl, A. (2003). Procedural justice theory and evaluations of the lawmaking process. Political Behavior,
Gibson, J. L. (1989). Understandings of justice: Institutional legitimacy, procedural justice, and political tolerance. Law and Society Review,
Gibson, J. L. (1991). Institutional legitimacy, procedural justice, and compliance with Supreme Court decisions. Law and Society Review,
Gibson, J. L. (2007). The legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court in a polarized polity. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies,
Gibson, J. L., Caldeira, G. A., & Spence, L. K. (2005). Why do people accept public policies they oppose? Testing legitimacy theory with a survey-based experiment. Political Research Quarterly,
Hetherington, M. J. (2004). Why trust matters: Declining political trust and the demise of American liberalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Hibbing, J. R., & Theiss-Morse, E. (1995). Congress as public enemy: Public attitudes toward American political institutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hibbing, John. R., & Theiss-Morse, E. (2002). Stealth democracy: Americans’ beliefs about how Government should work
. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Hurwitz, J., & Peffley, M. (2005). Explaining the great racial divide: Perceptions of fairness in the U.S criminal justice system. Journal of Politics,
Kam, C. D. (2005). Who toes the party line? Cues, values, and individual differences. Political Behavior,
Keele, L. J. (2005). The authorities really do matter: Party control and trust in government. Journal of Politics,
Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reason. Psychological Bulletin,
Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships. In K. Gergen, M. Greenberg, & R. Willis (Eds.), Social exchange. New York: Plenum.
Leventhal, G. S., Karuza, J., Jr., & Fry, W. R. (1980). Beyond fairness: A theory of allocation preferences. In G. Mikula (Ed.), Justice and social interaction. Bern, Switzerland: Huber.
Lodge, M., & Taber, C. (2002). Three steps toward a theory of motivated reasoning. In A. Lupia, M. D. McCubbins, & S. L. Popkin (Eds.), Elements of reason: Cognition, choice, and the bounds of rationality. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mutz, D. C., & Reeves, B. (2005). The new videomalaise: Effects of televised incivility on political trust. American Political Science Review,
Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2010). When corrections fail: The persistence of political misperceptions. Political Behavior,
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,
Ramirez, M. D. (2008). Procedural perceptions and support for the U.S. Supreme Court. Political Psychology,
Redlawsk, D. (2002). Hot cognition or cool consideration? Testing the effects of motivated reasoning on political decision making. Journal of Politics,
Rose, R., & Mishler, W. (2009). How do electors respond to an ‘unfair’ election? The experience of Russians. Post-Soviet Affairs,
Sullivan, J. L., Piereson, J. E., & Marcus, G. E. (1982). Political tolerance and American democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Taber, C. S., Cann, D., & Kucsova, S. (2009). The motivated processing of political arguments. Political Behavior,
Taber, C., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science,
Taber, C., Lodge, C., & Glathar, J. (2001). The motivated construction of political judgments. In J. H. Kuklinski (Ed.), Citizens and politics: Perspectives from political psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Tyler, T. R. (1994). Governing amid diversity: The effect of fair decision-making procedures on the legitimacy of government. Law & Society Review,
Tyler, T. R. (2000). Social justice: Outcome and procedure. International Journal of Psychology,
Tyler, T. R. (2001). The psychology of public dissatisfaction with government. In J. R. Hibbing & E. Theiss-Morse (Eds.), What is it about government that Americans dislike?. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tyler, T. R. (2006). Psychological perspectives on legitimacy and legitimation. Annual Review of Psychology,
Tyler, T. R., Boeckmann, R. J., Smith, H. J., & Huo, Y. J. (1997). Social justice in a diverse society. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Wilking, J. (2011). The portability of electoral procedural fairness: Evidence from experimental studies in China and the United States. Political Behavior,