Votes without power: Procedural justice as mutual control in majority-minority relations

Journal of Applied Social Psychology

Volumn 27, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 124-155

  Azzi, Assaad E ^a   Jost, John T ^b  

^a UNIVERSITÉ LIBRE DE BRUXELLES   (Belgium)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0031574607     PISSN: 00219029     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1997.tb00626.x     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 267-299). New York, NY: Academic.
2. Azzi, A. (1992). Procedural justice and the allocation of power in intergroup relations: Studies in the U.S. and South Africa. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 736-747.
3. Azzi, A. (1993). Implicit and category-based allocations of decision-making power in majority-minority relations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 203-228.
4. Bierhoff, H. W., Cohen, R. L., & Greenberg, J. (Eds.). (1986). Justice in social relations. New York, NY: Plenum.
5. Brett, J. M. (1986). Commentary on procedural justice papers. In R. Lewicki, M. Bazerman, & B. Sheppard (Eds.), Research on negotiation in organizations (Vol. 1, pp. 81-90). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
6. Brewer, M. B. (1979). Ingroup bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 307-324.
7. Cohen, R. L. (1986). Power and justice in intergroup relations. In H. W. Bierhoff, R. L. Cohen, & J. Greenberg (Eds.), Justice in social relations (pp. 65-86). New York, NY: Plenum.
8. Deutsch, M. (1973). The resolution of conflict. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
9. Deutsch, M. (1985). Distributive justice: A social-psychological perspective. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
10. Diehl, M. (1990). The minimal group paradigm: Theoretical explanations and empirical findings. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 1). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
11. 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.
12. Folger, R., Rosenfield, D., & Robinson, T. (1983). Relative deprivation and procedural justifications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 268-273.
13. Greenberg, J., & Cohen, R. L. (1982). Why justice? Normative and instrumental interpretations. In J. Greenberg & R. L. Cohen (Eds.), Equity and justice in social behavior (pp. 437-469). New York, NY: Academic.
14. Hastie, R., Penrod, S., & Pennington, N. (1983). Inside the jury. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
15. Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1988). Social identifications: A social psychology of intergroup relations and group processes. London, England: Routledge.
16. Houlden, P., LaTour, S., Walker, L., & Thibaut, J. (1978). Preferences for modes of dispute resolution as a function of process and decision control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14, 13-30.
17. Jost, J. T. (1995). Negative illusions: Conceptual clarification and psychological evidence concerning false consciousness. Political Psychology, 16, 397-424.
18. Jost, J. T., & Azzi, A. (1996). Microjustice and macrojustice in the allocation of resources between experimental groups. Journal of Social Psychology, 136, 349-365.
19. Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (Eds.). (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
20. Kelley, H. H., & Thibaut, J. (1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
21. Lane, R. E. (1988). Procedural goods in a democracy: How one is treated versus what one gets. Social Justice Research, 2, 177-192.
22. Leventhal, G. 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. Willies (Eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research (pp. 27-55). New York, NY: Plenum.
23. Lijphart, A. (1977). Democracy in plural societies: A comparative exploration. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
24. Lijphart, A. (1984). Democracies: Patterns of majoritarian and consensus government in twenty-one countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
25. Lind, E. A., Kanfer, R., & Earley, 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., Lissak, R. I., & Conlon, D. E. (1983). Decision control and process control effects on procedural fairness judgments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 13, 338-350.
27. Lind, E. A., & T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York, NY: Plenum.
28. Marcuse, H. (1965). Repressive tolerance. In R. P. Wolff, B. Moore, Jr., & H. Marcuse (Eds.), A critique of pure tolerance (pp. 81-123). Boston, MA: Beacon.
29. Messick, D. M., & Cook, K. S. (Eds.). (1983). Equity theory: Psychological and sociological perspectives. New York, NY: Praeger.
30. Miller, C. E. (1989). The social pyschological effects of group decision rules. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), Psychology of group influence (pp. 327-355). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
31. Miller, C. E., Jackson, P., Mueller, J., & Schersching, C. (1987). Some social psychological effects of group decision rules. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 325-332.
32. Sherif, M. (1966). In common predicament: Social psychology of intergroup conflict and cooperation. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
33. Tajfel, H. (1982). Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 33, 1-39.
34. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), The psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7-24). Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.
35. Thibaut, J., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social psychology of groups. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
36. Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
37. Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1978). A theory of procedure. California Law Review, 66, 541-566.
38. Thompson, L., & Loewenstein, G. F. (1992). Egocentric interpretations of fairness and interpersonal conflict. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 51, 176-197.
39. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.
40. Tyler, T. R. (1987). Conditions leading to value expressive effects on judgments of procedural justice: A test of four models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 333-344.
41. Tyler, T. R. (1989). The psychology of procedural justice: A test of the group-value model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 830-838.
42. Tyler, T. R. (1990). Why people obey the law. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
43. Tyler, T. R., & Bies, R. J. (1990). Beyond formal procedures: The interpersonal context of procedural justice. In J. S. Carroll (Ed.), Applied social psychology and organizational settings (pp. 77-98). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
44. Tyler, T. R., Rasinski, K., & Spodick, N. (1985). The influence of voice on satisfaction with leaders: Exploring the meaning of process control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 72-81.
45. Walster, E., Berscheid, E., & Walster, G. W. (1973). New directions in equity research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 151-176.