The Influence of Accuracy as a Function of Leader's Bias: The Role of Trustworthiness in the Psychology of Procedural Justice

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 293-304

  De Cremer, David ^a  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Accuracy; Bias; Procedural justice; Trustworthiness

Indexed keywords

AFFECT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CRIMINAL LAW; HUMAN; LEADERSHIP; PSYCHOLOGY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; TRUST;

AFFECT; ATTITUDE; CRIMINAL LAW; HUMANS; LEADERSHIP; PSYCHOLOGY; TRUST;

EID: 1142301981     PISSN: 01461672     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0146167203256969     Document Type: Article

References (55)

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 on managing 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 fairness make 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 from five 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: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human 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. Cracker, 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., & Felled, 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). Thousand Oaks, 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-value model. 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). Uncertainty management: 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.