One of the health psychological functions that helps people to share their affections and opinions with other people and to show more altruistic and cooperative behavior towards others is empathy (Cropanzano et al , 2017). Some social psychological researchers have emphasized the role of empathy in morality (e.g., Batson 2009; Eisenberg and Fabes 1990; Tyler et al. 1997; Wispe 1986). Yip and Schweitzer (2016) found that empathy mediates the relationship between anger and deception. Low levels of empathy towards organizations have a strong impact on the link between anger and unethical behavior. Angry people have greater intentions to engage in unethical behavior depending on their level of empathy towards the organization. Further evidence has shown that empathy increases employees' attentiveness to justice judgments and decreases their intention to blame victims due to their moral conditions (e.g., Aderman et al., 1974; Patient and Skarlicki, 2010 ). In another study, Cropanzano, Massaro & Becker (2017) described that individuals' effort to apply the rules of justice is linked to their cognitive and affective empathy towards another person or organization, so that the probability of their effort applying the rules of justice increases when experiencing cognitive and affective empathy with the organization. Cognitive empathy refers to understanding the feelings and thoughts of others through deliberative thinking. While, affective empathy consists of sharing emotional experiences with other people such as colleagues in the organization (Walter, 2012). Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essayOther mediators and moderators of the relationship between organizational injustice and ethical/unethical behavior Moral identity is a moderator between injustice and unethical behavior. People who have experienced injustice have greater intentions to engage in unethical behavior depending on their level of moral identity. Moral identity diminishes the effects of injustice on unethical behavior. Furthermore, other findings show that managers whose moral identity is high show greater motivation in intending to penalize transgressors, such as colleagues, with unjust behavior (Skarlicki and Rupp 2010). Emphasizing the different aspects of justice/injustice, researchers were directed to some of the moderators and mediators in distributive justice such as personality factors, fairness sensitivity, a construct that refers to sensitivity to capture differences between input/outcome ratio ( Huseman, HatWeld, & Miles, 1987) and motivation (Zapata-Phelan, Colquitt, Scott, & Livingston, 2009). As regards moderators of procedural justice, reference was made to the locus of control (Sweeney, McFarlin, & Cotton, 1991), delay of gratification (Joy & Witt, 1992), sensitivity to the injustice that has occurred (SBI; Schmitt and Dorfel, 1999), self-esteem (Brockner et al., 1998) and exchange ideology (Witt, Kacmar and Andrews, 2001) and belief in a just world (Hagedoorn, Buunk and van de Vliert, 2002). Furthermore, some of the moderators of interactional justice are agreeableness (Skarlicki et al., 1999) and self-esteem (Heuer, Blumenthal, Douglas, & Weinblatt, 1999). On integrative theories (called the “integrative wave” of justice literature; Colquitt et al., 2005), researchers have pointed to the propensity to trust, risk aversion (risk tolerance), and morality (Colquitt, Scott, Judge and Shaw, 2006).