Fairness evaluations of encounters with police officers and correctional officers

Journal of Applied Social Psychology

Volumn 28, Issue 12, 1998, Pages 1107-1124

  Vermunt, Riël ^a   Blaauw, Eric ^b,c   Lind, E Allan ^a  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b VU UNIVERSITY AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^c Netherlands Inst for the S   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0032537442     PISSN: 00219029     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1998.tb01670.x     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.
2. Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. S. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. In R. Lewicki, B. Sheppard, & M. Bazerman (Eds.), Research on negotiations in organizations (pp. 43-55). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
3. Blaauw, E., Kerkhof, A., & Vermunt, R. (1993). Zorg voor arrestanten in politiecellen [Care for detainees in Dutch police cells]. Leiden, The Netherlands: DSWO.
4. Blaauw, E., Kerkhof, A., Vermunt, R., De Vries, J., & Van Veen, M. (1995). Sterfgevallen onder de zorg van de politie [Deaths in police custody]. Leiden, The Netherlands: DSWO.
5. Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6. Greenberg, J. (1996). The quest for justice on the job. London, UK: Sage.
7. Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1988). Social identifications. London, UK: Routledge.
8. Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships. In K. Gergen, M. Greenberg, & R. Willis (Eds.), Social exchange (pp. 27-55). New York, NY: Plenum.
9. 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.
10. Lind, E. A., MacCoun, R. J., Ebener, P. A., Festiner, W. L. F., Hensler, D. R., Resnik, J., & Tyler, T. R. (1989). The perception of justice: Tort litigants' views of trial, court-annexed arbitration, and judicial settlement conferences. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
11. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup relations. In S. Worchel & W. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7-24). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
12. Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
13. Tyler, T. R. (1987). Conditions of value expressive effects in judgments of procedural justice: A test of four models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 333-344.
14. Tyler, T. R. (1988). What is procedural justice? Criteria used by citizens to assess the fairness of legal procedures. Law and Society Review, 22, 301-355.
15. 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.
16. 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.
17. Tyler, T. R., & Folger, R. (1980). Distributional and procedural aspects of satisfaction with citizen-police encounters. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 1, 281-292.
18. Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 115-191). New York, NY: Academic.
19. Van den Bos, K., Vermunt, R., & Wilke, H. (1997). The relationship between 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.
20. Vermunt, R., Van der Kloot, W. A., & Van der Meer, J. (1993). The effects of interactional criteria on procedural fairness judgments. Social Justice Research, 183-195.