This article focuses on how people interpret their own versus others’ treatment. Two experiments investigate how perceived procedural justice is affected by procedures that are experienced personally versus those seen to have been experienced by others. The studies show that, at least under some conditions, the treatment of others is as potent a consideration in justice judgments as is one’s own treatment. These findings are contrasted with previous insights into the psychology of social justice in general and procedural justice in particular.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Brockner, J., & Greenberg, J. (1990). The impact of layoffs on survivors: An organizational justice perspective. In J. Carroll (Ed.), Applied social psychology and organizational settings (pp. 45-75). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
2.
Brockner, J., Konovsky, M., Cooper-Schneider, R., Folger, R., Martin, C., & Bies, R. J. (1994). Interactive effects of procedural justice and outcome negativity on victims and survivors of job loss. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 397-409.
3.
Brockner, J., & Wiesenfeld, B. M. (1996). An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions: Interactive effects of outcomes and procedures. Psychological Bulletin, 120, 189-208.
4.
Cates, K. L., & Messick, D. M. (1996). Frequentistic adverbs as measures of egocentric biases. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 155-161.
5.
Cropanzano, R., & Greenberg, J. (1997). Progress in organizational justice: Tunneling through the maze. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 317-372). New York: John Wiley.
6.
Folger, R. (1977). Distributive and procedural justice: Combined impact of “voice” and improvement of experienced inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 108-119.
7.
Folger, R. (1984). Preface. In R. Folger (Ed.), The sense of injustice: Social psychological perspectives (pp. ix-x). New York: Plenum.
8.
Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Organizational justice and human resource management. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
9.
Greenberg, J. (1993). Stealing in the name of justice: Informational and interpersonal moderators of theft reactions to underpayment inequity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54, 81-103.
10.
Huo, Y. J. (1999). The complexity of social goods: Social identity, group interest, and entitlement beliefs. Unpublished manuscript.
11.
LaTour, S. (1978). Determinants of participant and observer satisfaction with adversary and inquisitorial modes of adjudication. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1531-1545.
12.
Lerner, M. J., & Somers, D. G. (1992). Employees’ reactions to an anticipated plant closure: The influence of positive illusions. In L. Montada, S. Filipp, & M. J. Lerner (Eds.), Life crises and experiences of loss in adulthood (pp. 229-253). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
13.
Lind, E. A., Kray, L., & Thompson, L. (1998). The social construction of injustice: Fairness judgments in response to own and others’ unfair treatment by authorities. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 75, 1-22.
14.
Lind, E. A., Kulik, C. T., Ambrose, M., & De Vera Park, M. V. (1993). Individual and corporate dispute resolution: Using procedural fairness as a decision heuristic. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 224-251.
15.
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.
16.
Messick, D. M. (1999). Alternative logics for decision making in social settings. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 39, 11-28.
17.
Messick, D. M., & Sentis, K. (1979). Fairness and preference. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 15, 418-434.
18.
Skarlicki, D. P., Ellard, J. H., & Kelln, B. R. C. (1998). Third-party perceptions of a layoff: Procedural, deorganization, and retributive aspects of justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 119-127.
19.
Skitka, L. J. (1998). Do the means justify the ends, or do the ends justify the means? A test of the moral mandate hypothesis. Unpublished manuscript.
20.
Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
21.
Tyler, T. R. (1990). Why do people obey the law? Procedural justice, legitimacy, and compliance. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
22.
Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 115-191). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
23.
van den Bos, K. (1999). What are we talking about when we talk about no-voice procedures? On the psychology of the fair outcome effect. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 560-577.
24.
van den Bos, K. (2000). Uncertainty management: The influence of uncertainty salience on reactions to perceived procedural fairness. Manuscript submitted for publication.
25.
van den Bos, K., Lind, E. A., Vermunt, R., & Wilke, H. A. M. (1997). How do I judge my outcome when I do not know the outcome of others?: The psychology of the fair process effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1034-1046.
26.
van den Bos, K., Lind, E. A., & Wilke, H. A. M. (in press). The psychology of procedural and distributive justice viewed from the perspective of fairness heuristic theory. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: Volume 2. From theory to practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
27.
van den Bos, K., & Miedema, J. (2000). Toward understanding why fairness matters: The influence of mortality salience on reactions to procedural fairness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 355-366.
28.
van den Bos, K., Van Schie, E. C. M., & Colenberg, S. E. (2000). Social justice in child day care centers. Unpublished manuscript.
29.
van den Bos, K., Vermunt, R., & Wilke, H. A. M. (1997). Procedural and distributive justice: What is fair depends more on what comes first than on what comes next. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 95-104.
30.
van den Bos, K., Wilke, H. A. M., & Lind, E. A. (1998). When do we need procedural fairness? The role of trust in authority. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1449-1458.
31.
van den Bos, K., Wilke, H. A. M., Lind, E. A., & Vermunt, R. (1998). Evaluating outcomes by means of the fair process effect: Evidence for different processes in fairness and satisfaction judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1493-1503.
32.
Vermunt, R., Wit, A. P., Van den Bos, K., & Lind, E. A. (1996). The effects of unfair procedure on affect and protest. Social Justice Research, 9, 109-119.
33.
Walker, L., LaTour, S., Lind, E. A., & Thibaut, J. (1974). Reactions of participants and observers to modes of adjudication. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 4, 295-310.
34.
Walker, L., Lind, E. A., & Thibaut, J. (1979). The relation between procedural and distributive justice. Virginia Law Review, 65, 1401-1420.
