Sometimes unfair procedures have nice aspects: On the psychology of the fair process effect

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Volumn 77, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 324-336

  Van Den Bos, Kees ^a   Bruins, Jan ^b   Wilke, Henk A M ^a   Dronkert, Elske ^a  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ESSEX   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0033430060     PISSN: 00223514     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.77.2.324     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. 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.
2. Cohen, R. L. (1982). Perceiving justice: An attributional perspective. In J. Greenberg & R. L. Cohen (Eds.), Equity and justice in social behavior (pp. 119-160). New York: Academic Press.
3. Cropanzano, R., & Folger, R. (1989). Referent cognitions and task decision autonomy: Beyond equity theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 293-299.
4. Cropanzano, R., & Folger, R. (1991). Procedural justice and worker motivation. In R. M. Steers & L. W. Porter (Eds.), Motivation and work behavior (Vol. 5, pp. 131-143). New York: McGraw-Hill.
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: 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). Emerging issues in the social psychology of justice. In R. Folger (Ed.), The sense of injustice: Social psychological perspectives (pp. 3-24). New York: Plenum.
8. Folger, R., & Konovsky, M. (1989). Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to pay raise decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 115-130.
9. Folger, R., Rosenfield, D., Grove, J., & Corkran, L. (1979). Effects of "voice" and peer opinions on responses to inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 2253-2261.
10. Furby, L. (1986). Psychology and justice. In R. L. Cohen (Ed.), Justice: Views from the social sciences (pp. 153-203). New York: Plenum.
11. Gilliland, S. W. (1994). Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to a selection system. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 691-701.
12. Greenberg, J. (1986). Determinants of perceived fairness of performance evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 340-342.
13. Greenberg, J. (1987). Using diaries to promote procedural justice in performance appraisals. Social Justice Research, 1, 219-234.
14. Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Journal of Management, 16, 399-432.
15. 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.
16. Greenberg, J., & Folger, R. (1983). Procedural justice, participation, and the fair process effect in groups and organizations. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), Basic group processes (pp. 235-256). New York: Springer-Verlag.
17. Innes, J. M., & Young, R. F. (1975). The effect of presence of an audience, evaluation apprehension and objective self-awareness on learning. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 11, 35-42.
18. Lerner, M. J., & Whitehead, L. A. (1980). Procedural justice viewed in the context of justice motive theory. In G. Mikula (Ed.), Justice and social interaction: Experimental and theoretical contributions from psychological research (pp. 219-256). Bern, Switzerland: Huber.
19. 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. Willis (Eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research (pp. 27-54). New York: Plenum.
20. Lind, E. A. (1998, May). Methods in procedural justice. Paper presented at the Seventh International Conference on Social Justice Research, Denver, CO.
21. Lind, E. A. (in press). Fairness heuristic theory: Justice judgments as pivotal cognitions in organizational relations. In J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organizational behavior. Lexington, MA: New Lexington.
22. Lind, E. A., & Earley, P. C. (1992). Procedural justice and culture. International Journal of Psychology, 27, 227-242.
23. 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.
24. Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.
25. Pyszczynski, T., Greenberg, J., & Holt, K. (1985). Maintaining consistency between self-serving beliefs and available data: A bias in information evaluation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 11, 179-190.
26. Pyszczynski, T., Greenberg, J., & LaPrelle, J. (1985). Social comparison after success and failure: Biased search for information consistent with a self-servicing conclusion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 195-211.
27. Rutte, C. G., & Messick, D. M. (1995). An integrated model of perceived unfairness in organizations. Social Justice Research, 8, 239-261.
28. Schlenker, B., Weigold, M. F., & Hallam, J. R. (1990). Self-serving attributions in social context: Effects of self-esteem and social pressure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 855-863.
29. Smith, H. J., Spears, R., & Oyen, M. (1994). "People like us": The influence of personal deprivation and group membership salience on justice evaluations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 277-299.
30. Sweeney, P. D., & McFarlin, D. B. (1993). Workers' evaluations of the "ends" and the "means": An examination of four models of distributive and procedural justice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54, 23-40.
31. Taylor, S. E., & Fiske, S. T. (1981). Getting inside the head: Methodologies for process analysis. In J. Harvey, W. Ickes, & R. Kidd (Eds.), New directions in attribution research (Vol. 3, pp. 459-524). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
32. Tyler, T. R. (1990). Why do people obey the law? Procedural justice, legitimacy, and compliance. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
33. 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.
34. Tyler, T. R., & DeGoey, P. (1995). Collective restraint in social dilemmas: Procedural justice and social identification effects on support for authorities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 482-497.
35. Tyler, T. R., & Folger, R. (1980). Distributional and procedural aspects of satisfaction with citizen-police encounters. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 1, 281-292.
36. 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.
37. Tyler, T. R., & Smith, H. J. (1997) Social justice and social movements. In D. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 595-629). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
38. Van den Bos, K. (in press). 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.
39. 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.
40. 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: Vol. 2. From theory to practice. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
41. 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 judgements and performance. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 411-428.
42. 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.
43. 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.
44. 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.
45. 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.
46. 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.
47. Weiner, B. (1985). "Spontaneous" causal thinking. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 74-84.