Perceptions of justice are an important consideration for organizations as past research has shown that when employees feel they are treated fairly, positive outcomes result and negative outcomes can be avoided. The current study examined the effects of private and public delivery of positive and negative feedback on perceptions of procedural and interactional justice. Although past research found no differences for channel when comparing face-to-face to email, current results indicate that differences existed across channel characteristic such that private delivery was viewed as more procedurally and interactionally just than public delivery. Positive feedback was also viewed as more procedurally and interactionally just than negative feedback. This may indicate to practitioners that a private channel is more appropriate for feedback and that giving positive feedback may help engender perceptions of just treatment in employees.
BallG. A.TrevinoL. K.SimsH. P.Jr.(1994). Just and unjust punishment: Influences on subordinate performance and citizenship. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 299-322.
2.
BarlingJ. B.PhillipsM. (1993). Interactional, formal, and distributive justice in the workplace: An exploratory study. Journal of Psychology, 127, 649-656.
3.
BiesR. J. (2001). Interactional (in)justice: The sacred and the profane. In GreenbergJ.CropanzanoR. (Eds.), Advances in organizational justice (pp. 89-118). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
4.
ByrneZ. S.CropanzanoR. (2001). The history of organizational justice: The founders speak. In CropanzanoR. (Ed.), Justice in the workplace (Vol. 2, pp. 3-26). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5.
ChoryR. M.Kingsley WestermanC. Y. (2009). Feedback and fairness: The relationship between negative performance appraisals and organizational justice. Western Journal of Communication, 73, 157-181.
6.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.
7.
ColquittJ. A.ConlonD. E.WessonM. J.PorterC. O. L. H.NgK. Y. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 425-445.
8.
ColquittJ. A.GreenbergJ. (2003). Organizational justice: A fair assessment of the state of the literature. In GreenbergJ. (Ed.), Organizational behavior: The state of the science (pp. 165-210). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
9.
ColquittJ. A.GreenbergJ.Zapata-PhelanC. P. (2005). What is organizational justice? A historical overview. In GreenbergJ.ColquittJ. A. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational justice (pp. 3-56). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10.
CropanzanoR.ByrneZ. S.BobocelD. R.RuppD. E. (2001). Moral virtues, fairness heuristics, social entities, and other denizens of organizational justice. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, 164-209.
11.
DibbleJ. L.LevineT. R. (2010). Breaking good and bad news: Direction of the MUM effect and senders’ cognitive representations of news valence. Communication Research, 37, 703-722.
12.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA.-G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175-191.
13.
FedorD. B.EderR. W.BuckleyM. R. (1989). The contributory effects of supervisor intentions on subordinate feedback responses. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 44, 396-414.
14.
GreenbergJ. (1994). Using socially fair treatment to promote acceptance of a work site smoking ban. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 288-297.
15.
JacobsM.JacobsA.FeldmanG.CaviorN. (1973). Feedback II: The “credibility gap:” Delivery of positive and negative and emotional and behavioral feedback in groups. Journal of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, 41, 215-223.
16.
JonesD. A.SkarlickiD. P. (2003). The relationship between perceptions of fairness and voluntary turnover among retail employees. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33, 1226-1243.
17.
KacmarK. M.WayneS. J.WrightP. M. (1996). Subordinate reactions to the use of impression management tactics and feedback by the supervisor. Journal of Managerial Issues, 8, 35-53.
18.
MiceliM. P. (1993). Justice and pay system satisfaction. In CropanzanoR. (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: Approaching fairness in human resource management (pp. 257-283). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
19.
MiceliM. P.LaneM. C. (1991). Antecedents of pay satisfaction: A review and extension. In RowlandK. M.FerrisG. R. (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 9, pp. 235-309). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
20.
MoormanR. H. (1991). Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship?Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 845-855.
21.
O’SullivanP. B. (2000). What you don’t know won’t hurt me: Impression management functions of communication channels in relationships. Human Communication Research, 26, 403-431.
PetronioS. (2002). Boundaries of privacy: Dialectics of disclosure. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
24.
PettijohnC.PettijohnL. S.TaylorA. J.KeillorB. D. (2001). Are performance appraisals a bureaucratic exercise or can they be used to enhance sales-force satisfaction and commitment?Psychology & Marketing, 18, 337-364.
25.
RosenS.TesserA. (1970). On reluctance to communicate undesirable information: The MUM effect. Sociometry, 33, 253-263.
26.
SkarlickiD. P.FolgerR. (1997). Retaliation in the workplace: The roles of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 434-443.
27.
SteelmanL. A.RutkowskiK. A. (2004). Moderators of employee reactions to negative feedback. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 19, 6-18.
28.
SussmanS. W.SproullL. (1999). Straight talk: Delivering bad news through electronic communication. Information Systems Research, 10, 150-166.
29.
TimmermanP. D.HarrisonW. (2005). The discretionary use of electronic media: Four considerations for bad news bearers. Journal of Business Communication, 42, 379-389. doi:10.1177/0021943605279059
30.
WaltherJ. B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19, 52-90.
31.
WaltherJ. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3-43.
32.
WaltherJ. B.RamirezA.Jr. (2010). New technologies and new directions in online relating. In SmithS.WilsonS. (Eds.), New directions in interpersonal communication research (pp. 264-284). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
33.
WestermanC. Y. K. (2008). Silence or voice? Using facework and communication apprehension to explain employee responses to autonomy and competence face threats posed by negative feedback. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing.
34.
WestermanC. Y. K.WestermanD. (2010) Supervisor impression management: message content and channel effects on impressions. Communication Studies, 61, 585-601.
35.
WolfeS. E.PiqueroA. R. (2011). Organizational justice and police misconduct. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38, 332-353.
36.
Van DyneL.AngS.BoteroI. C. (2003). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of Management Studies, 40, 1359-1392.
37.
YamaguchiI. (2005). Interpersonal communication tactics and procedural justice for uncertainty management of Japanese workers. Journal of Business Communication, 42, 168-194. doi:10.1177/0021943605274600
