Abstract
Background
In the evolving modern workplaces, the psychological well-being of employees has become a focal point of organizational research. Organizational justice has emerged as a key determinant among the factors influencing their well-being.
Objective
This study examined associations between organizational justice and loneliness in the workplace.
Methods
A web-based panel survey was conducted among 2,074 full-time employees to measure isolation and loneliness in the workplace (“sense of loneliness in the workplace”, “emotional connections in the workplace”, “sense of assistance in the workplace”, and “sense of usefulness in the workplace”) and organizational justice (“procedural justice”, “distributive justice”, “interpersonal justice”, and “information justice”).
Results
The hierarchical multiple regression analyses indicated that procedural justice and interpersonal justice were associated negatively with “sense of loneliness in the workplace” and positively with “sense of assistance in the workplace.” All dimensions of organizational justice were positively associated with “emotional connections in the workplace” and “sense of usefulness in the workplace.” This study shows that organizational justice is associated negatively with workplace loneliness and positively with emotional connections, the existence of job supporters, and a sense of usefulness.
Conclusion
These findings can inform measures for preventing employees from feeling isolated or lonely and may contribute to the development of research on employee well-being.
Keywords
Introduction
In the evolving landscape of modern workplaces, characterized by remote and hybrid work models, the psychological well-being of employees has become a focal point of organizational research. 1 Among the various factors influencing well-being, organizational justice—employees’ perceptions of fairness in decision-making processes, resource distribution, and interpersonal treatment—has emerged as a key determinant. 2 Moreover, organizational justice has gained attention as a significant determinant of psychological and interpersonal outcomes. 3 From this perspective, perceived injustice may relate to employees’ experiences of workplace isolation and loneliness.
Loneliness has been described as a subjective experience stemming from a lack of social relationships and characterized as unpleasant and distressing. 4 Loneliness in the workplace is defined as the distress that arises from a perceived lack of high-quality interpersonal relationships among employees in the work environment. It has been shown to consist of two elements: emotional deprivation and social companionship. 5 The Workplace Isolation and Loneliness Scale, developed in Japan,6,7 identifies four factors: “sense of loneliness in the workplace,” “emotional connections in the workplace,” “sense of assistance in the workplace,” and “sense of usefulness in the workplace.” Among these, the “sense of usefulness in the workplace” represents a distinctive aspect of workplace loneliness. 7 This concept was not included in the scale developed by Wright et al. 5 One possible contextual interpretation for its exclusion is relational mobility, defined as the degree to which people in a society have opportunities to voluntarily form and dissolve interpersonal relationships. Thomson et al. 8 found that relational mobility is relatively low in East Asian societies, including Japan, and that lower relational mobility is associated with stable relationships that are not easily changeable. Accordingly, in the Japanese context, perceptions of being valued, relied on, or needed at work may be particularly salient when considering workplace loneliness, although this interpretation awaits direct empirical testing. Consistent with the concepts of a “sense of being relied on at work 9 ” and a “sense of not being appreciated by organizations and colleagues, 10 ” lacking a “sense of usefulness in the workplace” may indicate loneliness. However, these four dimensions are not assumed to have antecedent-consequent relationships with one another; rather, they function as parallel indicators representing workplace loneliness. 7
Previous studies have suggested that isolation and loneliness are risk factors for cognitive decline and an increase in negative and depressive cognition. 11 Workplace loneliness has been found to be associated with job satisfaction,5,12,13 organizational commitment,13–17 turnover intention,5,12,13,18,19 performance,17,20,21 well-being,10,22 work engagement, 16 and career urgency. 19 Few studies have focused on factors that influence loneliness among employees, but individuals’ perception of the quality of their social relationships is a factor that likely influences loneliness. 23 In addition, difficulties in social interaction and a lack of opportunities for meaningful exchanges may lead to occupational isolation and loneliness in the workplace. 24 Research on employees has shown that a supportive work environment reduces loneliness, 22 and that social support and meaningful daily interactions are negatively associated with loneliness. 25
Recent studies suggested that interactional justice fully mediates the relationship between authentic leadership and workplace loneliness. 2 Organizational justice is defined as perceived fairness within an organization that includes two components: distributive justice, which concerns the fairness of resource distribution outcomes, and procedural justice, which relates to the fairness of the processes by which those outcomes are determined. 26 Interactional justice, which pertains to interpersonal treatment during those processes, is also considered part of organizational justice. 27 Colquitt 28 further divided interactional justice into two dimensions: interpersonal justice, which refers to how supervisors treat subordinates, and informational justice, which concerns information disclosure.
Low organizational justice can increase the risk of health problems in the workplace 26 and is associated with minor mental disorders. 29 Associations between organizational justice and cardiovascular disease have been reported, indicating that organizational justice is directly related to absence due to illness and indirectly related to turnover rates. 30 Conversely, a meta-analysis demonstrated that a high level of organizational justice promotes organizational citizenship behavior and commitment. 3 Furthermore, the relationship between organizational justice and autonomous motivation has also been demonstrated.31,32
Interactional justice, which includes the perception of respectful and dignified treatment from supervisors, has been shown to reduce loneliness and enhance psychological safety in remote and hybrid work contexts. 1 Procedural and distributive justice also contribute to this dynamic by promoting a sense of control and fairness in resource distribution and decision-making processes, which may decrease perceived exclusion. 33 During the COVID-19 pandemic, the concept of teleworking has gained prominence, but despite this interest, empirical studies investigating the effect of workplace isolation on employees’ behavior are limited. 34 According to Lind and Tyler, 35 fair procedures within organizations enhance loyalty and group cohesiveness. In other words, organizational justice can influence workplace loneliness.
Although prior research has linked workplace loneliness to employee outcomes and organizational justice to favorable work attitudes and interpersonal experiences, gaps remain. First, few studies have directly examined the association between organizational justice and workplace loneliness, particularly at the subdimensional level. As a result, it remains unclear whether procedural, distributive, interpersonal, and informational justice show distinct patterns across aspects of workplace loneliness. Second, most research has relied on general or Western-derived conceptualizations, whereas the Japanese Workplace Isolation and Loneliness Scale includes a localized dimension, namely “sense of usefulness in the workplace,” capturing whether employees feel relied on or needed. Examining this dimension alongside conventional indicators may provide a more contextually grounded understanding of how fairness perceptions relate to employees’ social experiences.
Based on organizational justice theory and prior findings, we hypothesized that organizational justice would be negatively associated with a “sense of loneliness in the workplace” and positively associated with “emotional connections in the workplace,” “sense of assistance in the workplace,” and “sense of usefulness in the workplace.” We examined associations between the four justice dimensions and each workplace loneliness subscale (Figure 1). Rather than treating either construct as unitary, this study adopts a multidimensional approach to identify which forms of fairness are most closely associated with specific loneliness-related experiences. This multidimensional approach is theoretically important because it allows us to move beyond the question of whether organizational justice matters for workplace loneliness and to ask which forms of justice are most relevant to specific loneliness-related experience.
A conceptual model diagram.
Methods
Participants and procedure
We conducted a web-based panel survey targeting men and women in their 20s to 50s who work at least three days a week and are employed by companies. A cross-sectional, web-based survey was considered appropriate because both organizational justice and workplace loneliness are subjective perceptions that are commonly assessed using self-report measures. This approach also enabled the recruitment of a large and occupationally diverse sample of full-time employees under standardized survey conditions. To reduce potential response bias associated with snowball sampling, data were collected using an Internet research company, a method commonly employed in academic research in Japan. The survey was conducted through a research firm (INTAGE Inc.). A request to respond to a survey stating the purpose of the research was sent to employees registered in the panel, and only those who provided consent completed the survey. The response time was approximately 10 min. Among the respondents, 2,074 full-time employees were included in the analysis, having excluded non-regular employees and corporate executives (1,285 men, 789 women; mean age = 39.60 years, SD = 10.88). As this study is part of a longitudinal cohort, we anticipated attrition during follow-up and therefore set the sample size at approximately 2,000 participants. Respondents’ demographic characteristics are presented in Table 1. This cross-sectional study was performed between September 28 and 30, 2022.
Respondents’ demographic characteristics.
Survey items
Workplace loneliness
Workplace loneliness was measured using the Workplace Isolation and Loneliness Scale (16 items) developed by Nakamura et al.6,7 The scale consists of four subscales: “sense of loneliness in the workplace”, “emotional connections in the workplace”, “sense of assistance in the workplace”, and “sense of usefulness in the workplace”. Responses were rated on a four-point scale, ranging from 1 (“not applicable”) to 4 (“applicable”). The average score for each item was used as the subscale score.
Organizational justice
Organizational justice was measured using the Japanese version of the Organizational Justice Scale (20 items) developed by Shibaoka et al. 36 The scale consists of four subscales: “procedural justice”, “distributive justice”, “interpersonal justice”, and “information justice”. Responses were rated on a five-point scale, ranging from 1 (“strongly disagree”) to 5 (“strongly agree”). The average score for each item was used as the subscale score.
Demographic information
In addition to the above questionnaire items, respondents were asked to provide demographic information such as their age, sex, job position, industry, and occupation.
Statistical analysis
IBM SPSS® Statistics version 29 (IBM, USA) was used for t-tests, one-way analysis of variance, and hierarchical multiple regression analysis. Hierarchical multiple regression analysis was employed because the four subscales of workplace loneliness were treated as continuous dependent variables, and the aim was to examine the independent associations of each organizational justice dimension after adjusting for demographic characteristics. This approach also enabled comparison of the relative contributions of procedural, distributive, interpersonal, and informational justice within the same model.
Results
Descriptive statistics and inter-scale correlations
First, Cronbach's alpha coefficients were calculated for each subscale of the measures. The average value of each corresponding item was subsequently used as the scale score, mean scores and SDs were calculated by sex, and t-tests were conducted (Table 2). The results revealed that women scored significantly higher than men on “emotional connections in the workplace” [t(1546.28) = 2.56, p < .05, r = .06] and “sense of assistance in the workplace” [t(2072) = 3.15, p < .01, r = .07]. In addition, women scored significantly higher on interpersonal justice [t(2072) = 3.90, p < .001, r = .09].
Mean, SDs, and t-test results of each scale by sex
***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05.
Mean scores and SDs were calculated by age group, and a one-way analysis of variance and multiple comparisons using the Tukey method were conducted (Table 3). Among the subscales of isolation and loneliness in the workplace, scores on the “sense of usefulness in the workplace” [F(3, 2070) = 10.46, p < .001, η2 = .02] were significantly higher for employees in their 40s and 50s compared to those in their 20s, and employees in their 50s also scored significantly higher than those in their 30s. Procedural justice scores [F(3, 2070) = 3.41, p < .05, η2 = .01] were significantly higher among employees in their 20s than those in their 40s. Distributive [F(3, 2070) = 5.51, p < .01, η2 = .01] and interpersonal [F(3, 2070) = 4.28, p < .01, η2 = .01] justice scores were significantly higher among employees in their 20s than among those in their 40s and 50s. For information justice [F(3, 2070) = 8.77, p < .001, η2 = .01], employees in their 20s scored significantly higher than those in their 40s and 50s, and those in their 30s scored significantly higher than those in their 50s.
Means and SDs of each scale, and results of multiple comparisons (Tukey's method) by age group.
***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05.
Mean scores and SDs calculated by job position, as well as t-tests (Table 4), recorded that for “sense of loneliness in the workplace” [t(2072) = 3.20, p < .01, r = .07], non-management employees scored significantly higher than management employees. In contrast, “emotional connections in the workplace” [t(2072) = 2.43, p < .05, r = .05], “sense of assistance in the workplace” [t(309.87) = 2.07, p < .05, r = .12], and “sense of usefulness in the workplace” [t(298.76) = 9.28, p < .001, r = .47] scores were significantly higher among management employees than among non-management employees. For organizational justice, scores for procedural [t(2072) = 4.32, p < .001, r = .09] and distributive [t(2072) = 2.58, p < .05, r = .06] justice were significantly higher among management employees than among non-management employees.
Means, SDs, and t-test results of each scale by job position.
***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05.
Mean scores and standard deviations calculated by telework status, along with t-test results (Table 5), indicated that scores for procedural justice [t(2072) = 4.46, p < .001, r = .10], distributive justice[t(2072) = 5.19, p < .001, r = .11], interpersonal justice[t(2072) = 3.84, p < .001, r = .08], and information justice [t(2072) = 4.36, p < .001, r = .10] were significantly higher among telework employees than among non-telework employees. In contrast, no significant difference was observed in workplace isolation and loneliness.
Means, standard deviations, and t-test results of each scale by telework status.
***p < .001.
Next, correlation coefficients among the variables were calculated (Table 6), with “sense of loneliness in the workplace” reflecting significant negative correlations of approximately .40 with all four subscales of organizational justice. Conversely, “emotional connections in the workplace”, “sense of assistance in the workplace”, and “sense of usefulness in the workplace” showed significant positive correlations of ≥ .40 with the four subscales of organizational justice.
Correlation coefficients among each scale.
**p < .01.
Hierarchical multiple regression analyses
To examine the associations between organizational justice and isolation and loneliness in the workplace, hierarchical multiple regression analyses were conducted using each of the four subscales of workplace isolation and loneliness as dependent variables. In the first step, control variables (sex, age, and job position (presence or absence)) were entered. In Step 2, the four subscales of organizational justice were entered using the forced entry method. The results (Table 7) showed that the increase in R2 in Step 2 was significant for all dependent variables (“sense of loneliness in the workplace”: ΔR2 = .20, p < .001; “emotional connections in the workplace”: ΔR2 = .36, p < .001; “sense of assistance in the workplace”: ΔR2 = .26, p < .001; and “sense of usefulness in the workplace”: ΔR2 = .38, p < .001).
Results of hierarchical multiple regression analysis with subscales of isolation and loneliness in the workplace as dependent variables.
***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05.
Regarding “sense of loneliness in the workplace”, significant negative paths were found regarding procedural (β = –.20, p < .001) and interpersonal (β = –.21, p < .001) justice. For “emotional connections in the workplace”, significant positive paths were found in procedural (β = .31, p < .001), distributive (β = .12, p < .001), interpersonal (β = .15, p < .001), and information (β = .12, p < .01) justice. For “sense of assistance in the workplace”, significant positive paths were found in procedural (β = .33, p < .001) and interpersonal (β = .15, p < .001) justice. For “sense of usefulness in the workplace”, significant positive paths were found in all four subscales: procedural (β = .18, p < .001), distributive (β = .17, p < .001), interpersonal (β = .26, p < .001), and information (β = .10, p < .01) justice.
Discussion
This study examined the association between organizational justice and workplace loneliness. The results revealed that overall, organizational justice was negatively associated with “sense of loneliness in the workplace” and positively associated with “emotional connections in the workplace”, “sense of assistance in the workplace”, and “sense of usefulness in the workplace”. A theoretical contribution of this study is its treatment of both organizational justice and workplace loneliness as multidimensional constructs, enabling examination of differential associations between forms of fairness and distinct loneliness-related experiences at work.
Specifically, “sense of loneliness in the workplace” was negatively associated with procedural and interpersonal justice, whereas no significant associations were observed from distributive or information justice. These findings suggest that, if the procedures leading up to evaluations—such as those involving salary, promotions, and job roles—are fair, and if supervisors with the authority to determine these evaluations treat employees sincerely, then employees are less likely to experience loneliness. The lack of a significant association between distributive justice and the “sense of loneliness in the workplace” may suggest that loneliness is influenced less by the fairness of outcomes themselves than by the relational meaning conveyed through organizational processes and interpersonal treatment. This pattern is consistent with relational perspectives on organizational justice, which propose that fair procedures and respectful treatment signal whether employees are valued members of the group.35,38 Procedural justice and interpersonal justice may be more important in this regard because they signal respect, inclusion, and one's standing within the workplace, thereby addressing socio-emotional needs more directly.37,38 By contrast, distributive justice primarily concerns the fairness of outcomes such as pay or rewards, and may not, by itself, reduce feelings of social disconnection. This interpretation aligns with social exchange theory, which suggests that fair procedures and respectful treatment may be more relevant than fair outcomes alone for employees’ sense of belonging and interpersonal evaluation of the workplace.37,39 Prior studies have likewise shown that procedural justice is more strongly related than distributive justice to evaluative and affective responses.35,40,41 The present findings extend this line of research by suggesting that this pattern may also apply to workplace loneliness. The results of this study are consistent with those of previous studies.
All factors of organizational justice were associated with “emotional connections in the workplace”, with procedural justice showing the strongest association. The association of all four justice dimensions with this outcome suggests that emotional connectedness reflects multiple aspects of fairness, including outcomes, procedures, respectful treatment, and adequate explanations. This suggests that, if the evaluation outcomes received by employees are perceived as fair and if supervisors treat employees with respect while providing appropriate information disclosure, then employees are more likely to experience emotional connections in the workplace. However, the fairness of the procedures leading up to the determination of evaluation outcomes has a significant impact on the extent to which emotional connections in the workplace are experienced. This is consistent with Lind and Tyler's 35 view that judgments of procedural justice have a strong influence on group cohesion.
Procedural and interpersonal justice showed strong positive associations with “sense of assistance in the workplace”, whereas no significant associations were observed with distributive or information justice. This pattern is also consistent with organizational justice research and social exchange theory, which suggest that fair procedures and respectful treatment sustain cooperative and supportive workplace relationships.37,39 Thus, if the processes leading up to the determination of evaluation outcomes are fair and supervisors treat employees with sincerity, then employees are more likely to perceive that there is a person in the workplace who supports their work. In particular, a strong association with procedural justice was observed, suggesting the importance of ensuring that the procedures leading up to the determination of evaluation outcomes are unbiased and consistent, as well as the importance of individuals being able to exert some influence over these procedures and evaluations. If procedural justice is not maintained, suspicion may arise, and cooperative relationships in which colleagues support one another's work are unlikely to develop. However, if the evaluation process is fair, employees may feel at liberty to ask work-related questions at any time and recognize that a person in the workplace supports their work.
All factors of organizational justice were associated with “sense of usefulness in the workplace”, but interpersonal justice had the strongest association. This finding is theoretically important because “sense of usefulness in the workplace” captures not only the absence of disconnection but also whether employees feel relied on, needed, or socially valued. Accordingly, organizational justice may relate not only to lower loneliness-related experiences but also to employees’ sense of social worth. Accordingly, if the evaluation outcomes and processes are fair and if appropriate information is disclosed by supervisors, employees are more likely to experience a sense of usefulness in the workplace; however, the sincerity with which they are treated by the supervisor who determines their evaluations showed a strong association with this perception. The sense of being needed and expected in the workplace is experienced through interpersonal interactions, and given the chain of command, the relationship with one's supervisor is crucial.
Collectively, the findings suggest that the association between organizational justice and workplace loneliness is multidimensional rather than uniform. Procedural and interpersonal justice were more closely related to the more relationally salient aspects of workplace loneliness, such as feeling lonely or unsupported, whereas all four justice dimensions were associated with emotional connection and usefulness. This pattern advances prior research by showing that the link between justice and workplace loneliness is not adequately captured by treating either construct as unitary.
Limitations
Among organizational justice, procedural and interpersonal justice had a strong association with workplace loneliness. Although these are closely associated with supervisors, this survey did not capture the attitudes and behavior of actual supervisors. Future research should examine how supervisors’ attitudes and behaviors affect workplace loneliness.
Additionally, although this study targeted only full-time employees, future research should expand the sample to include non-regular employees and examine differences based on employment type.
Conclusions
This study showed that procedural and interpersonal justice are significantly associated with workplace loneliness. Although the relationship between organizational justice and workplace isolation and loneliness is suggested, this study did not examine potential causal links. This study clarified correlational relationships between organizational justice (which includes procedural, distributive, interpersonal, and informational justice) and workplace loneliness, emotional connections, existence of job supporters, and sense of usefulness. These findings can be useful when considering measures to prevent employees from feeling isolated or lonely, and may contribute to the development of research on employee well-being.
Footnotes
Ethical approval (name of institute and number)
All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations. The survey was conducted with the approval of the ethics committee of the University of Tsukuba (approval number: Tou 22-76).
Informed consent
Informed consent for participation was obtained from all participants as a part of the questionnaire survey.
Funding
The authors declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. This study was supported by JST RISTEX, Japan (grant number JPMJR X21K4). The funder had no role in the conceptualization, design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Conflict of interest
The authors declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
