The present research examined the combined effect of accuracy of procedures and leader’s bias on fairness judgments and the experience of positive emotions. The results of two studies showed that the strongest positive effects on both types of reactions were found when procedures were accurate and the leader was unbiased. In addition, accuracy of procedures only revealed an impact when the leader was perceived as unbiased rather than biased. Moreover, this interactive effect was found to be mediated, at least partly, by perceptions of trustworthiness. These findings show that more research is needed on examining different types of procedural fairness, both as single and combined predictors of people’s reactions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267-299). New York: Academic Press.
2.
Austin, W., & Walster, E. (1974). Reactions to confirmations and disconfirmations of expectancies of equity and inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 208-216.
3.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
4.
Barrett-Howard, E., & Tyler, T. R. (1986). Procedural justice as a criterion in allocation decision. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 296-304.
5.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497-529.
6.
Bies, R. J., & Tripp, T. M. (1996). Beyond distrust: “Getting even” and the need for revenge. In T. R. Tyler & R. Kramer (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 246-260). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7.
Bies, R. J., & Tripp, T. M. (2002). “Hot flashes, open wounds”: Injustice and the tyranny of its emotions. In D. D. Steiner, D. P. Skarlicki,& S. W. Gilliland (Eds.), Emerging perspectives onmanaging organizational justice (pp. 203-221). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
8.
Brief, A. P. (2001). Organizational behavior and the study of affect: Keep your eyes on the organization. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, 131-139.
9.
Brockner, J., Ackerman, G., & Fairchild, G. (2001). When do elements of procedural fairnessmake a difference? A classification of moderating influences. In J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organizational justice (pp. 179-212). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
10.
Brockner, J., Heuer, L., Siegel, P. A., Wiesenfeld, B., Martin, C., Grover, S., et al. (1998). The moderating effect of self-esteem in reaction to voice: Converging evidence fromfive studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 394-407.
11.
Brockner, J.Siegel, P. A., Daly, J. P., Tyler, T. R., & Martin, C. (1997). When trust matters: The moderating effect of outcome favorability. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 558-583.
12.
Clay-Warner, J. (2001). Perceiving procedural injustice: The effects of group membership and status. Social Psychology Quarterly, 64, 224-238.
13.
Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P. E. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: Ameta-analysis. Organizational Behavior andHuman Decision Processes, 86, 278-321.
14.
Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 386-400.
15.
Crocker, J., & Major, B. (1989). Social stigma and self-esteem: The self-protective properties of stigma. Psychological Review, 96, 608-630.
16.
Deutsch, M. (1985). Distributive justice: A social psychological perspective. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
17.
Earley, P. C., & Lind, E. A. (1987). Procedural justice and participation in task selection: The role of control in mediating justice judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1148-1160.
18.
Folger, R. (1977). Distributive and procedural justice: Combined impact of voice and improvement on experienced inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 108-119.
19.
Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Organizational justice and human resource management. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
20.
Gilliland, S. W. (1994). Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to a selection system. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 691-734.
21.
Krehbiel, P. J., & Cropanzano, R. (2000). Procedural justice, outcome favorability, and emotion. Social Justice Research, 13, 339-360.
22.
Kurlan, N. B., & Pelled, L. H. (2000). Passing the word: Toward a model of gossip and power in the workplace. Academy of Management Review, 25, 428-438.
23.
Leventhal, C. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships. In K. J. Gergen, M. S. Greenberg, & R. H. Willis (Eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research (pp. 27-55). New York: Plenum.
24.
Lind, E. A. (2001). Fairness heuristic theory: Justice judgments as pivotal cognitions in organizational relations. In J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organizational justice (pp. 56-88). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
25.
Lind, E. A., Kanfer, R., & Earley, P. C. (1990). Voice, control, and procedural justice: Instrumental and noninstrumental concerns in fairness judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 952-959.
26.
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.
27.
Lind, E. A., Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. J. (1997). Procedural context and culture: Variations in the antecedents of procedural justice judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 767-780.
28.
Major, B., Quinton, W., & McCoy, S. (2002). Antecedents and consequences of attributions to discrimination: Theoretical and empirical advances. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 251-330.
29.
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709-734.
30.
McFarlin, D. B., & Sweeney, P. D. (1996). Does having a say matter only if you get your way? Instrumental and value-expressive effects of employee voice. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 18, 289-303.
31.
Mikula, G., Scherer, K. R.,& Athenstaedt, U. (1998). The role of injustice in the elicitation of differential emotional reactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 769-783.
32.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behavior: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26, 513-563.
33.
Skarlicki, D. P., & Folger, R. (1997). Retaliation in the workplace: The roles of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 434-443.
34.
Sprecher, S. (1986). The relation between inequity and emotions in close relationships. Social Psychology Quarterly, 49, 309-321.
35.
Thibaut, J. W., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
36.
Tyler, T. R. (1988). What is procedural justice? Law and Society Review, 22, 301-355.
37.
Tyler, T. R. (1994). Psychological models of the justice motive: Antecedents of distributive and procedural justice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 850-863.
38.
Tyler, T. R. (1999). Why people cooperate with organizations: An identity-based perspective. In R. I. Sutton & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 21, pp. 201-246). Stamford, CT: JAI.
39.
Tyler, T. R. (2001). Procedural strategies for gaining deference: Increasing social harmony or creating false consciousness? In J. M. Darley, D. M. Messick, & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Social influences on ethical behavior in organizations (pp. 69-87). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
40.
Tyler, T. R., & Degoey, P. (1996). Trust in organizational authorities: The influence of motive attributions on willingness to accept decisions. In T. R. Tyler & R. Kramer (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 331-356). ThousandOaks, CA: Sage.
41.
Tyler, T. R., Degoey, P., & Smith, H. (1996). Understanding why the justice of group procedures matter: A test of the psychological dynamics of the group-valuemodel. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 913-930.
42.
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). New York: Academic Press.
43.
Tyler, T. R., & Smith, H. J. (1998). Social justice and social movements. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 595-629). New York: McGraw-Hill.
44.
Tyler, T. R., & Smith, H. J. (1999). Justice, social identity, and group processes. In T. R. Tyler, R. M. Kramer, & O. P. John (Eds.), The psychology of the social self (pp. 223-264). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
45.
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.
46.
Van den Bos, K. (2001a). Fundamental research by means of laboratory experiments is essential for a better understanding of organizational justice. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, 254-259.
47.
Van den Bos, K. (2001b). Uncertaintymanagement: The influence of uncertainty salience on reactions to perceived procedural fairness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 931-941.
48.
Van den Bos, K., & Spruijt, N. (2002). Appropriateness of decisions as a moderator of the psychology of voice. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 57-72.
49.
Van den Bos, K., Vermunt, R., & Wilke, H. A. M. (1996). The consistency rule and the voice effect: The influence of expectations on procedural fairness judgments and performance. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 411-428.
50.
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.
51.
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.
52.
Van den Bos, K., Wilke, H. A. M., Lind, E. A., & Vermunt, R. (1998). Evaluating outcomes by means of the fair process: Evidence for different processes in fairness and satisfaction judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1493-1503.
53.
Vermunt, R., Wit, A., Van den Bos, K., & Lind, E. A. (1996). The effects of unfair procedures on affect and protest. Social Justice Research, 8, 109-119.
54.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A.,& Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070.
55.
Weiss, H. M., Suckow, K., & Cropanzano, R. (1999). Effects of justice conditions on discrete emotions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 786-794.
