Self appraisal 'voice' and perceptions of justice: Examining the impact and interdependence of instrumental and value-expressive effects

International Journal of Conflict Management

Volumn 14, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 23-41

  Geddes, Deanna ^a,c   Merriman, Kimberly ^b   Ross III, Gerald ^a,c   Dunlap Hinkler, Denise ^a,c  

^a TEMPLE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b WICHITA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c TEMPLE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 2142795833     PISSN: 10444068     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/eb022889     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Atwater, L. E. (1998). The advantages and pitfalls of self-assessment in organizations. In J. W. Smither (Ed.), Performance appraisal: State of the art in practice (pp. 331-369). San Francisco: Jossey Bass Inc.
2. Atwater, L. E., & Yammarino, F. J. (1997). Self-other rating agreement: A review and model. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 15, 121-174.
3. Avery, D. R., & Quiñones, M. A. (2002). Disentangling the effects of voice: The incremental roles of opportunity, behavior, and instrumentality in predicting procedural fairness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 81-89.
4. Barry, B., & Shapiro, D. L. (2000). When will grievants desire voice?: A test of situational, motivational, and attributional explanations. International Journal of Conflict Management, 11, 106-134.
5. Becker, B. E., Huselid, M. A., & Ulrich, D. (2001). The HR scorecard: Linking people, strategy, and performance. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
6. Blakeley, G. L. (1993). The effects of performance rating discrepancies on supervisors and subordinates. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54, 57-80.
7. 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 Press.
8. 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.
9. Campbell, D. J., & Lee, C. (1988). Self-appraisal in performance evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 13, 187-196.
10. Cawley, B. D., Keeping, L. M., & Levy, P. E. (1998). Participation in the performance appraisal process and employee reactions: A meta-analytic review of field investigations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 615-633.
11. Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 386-400.
12. Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., & Ng. K. Y. (2001). Justice at the millenium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research, Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 425-445.
13. Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 98-104.
14. Cropanzano, R., & Ambrose, M. L. (2001). Procedural and distributive justice are more similar than you think: A monistic perspective and a research agenda. In J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organizational justice (pp. 119-151). Stanford. CA: Stanford University Press.
15. Cropanzano, R., & Prehar, C. A. (2001). Emerging justice concerns in an era of changing psychological contracts. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: From theory to practice (Vol. 2, pp. 245-269). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.
16. deLeon, L., & Ewen, A. J. (1997). Multi-source performance appraisals. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 17, 22-36.
17. Fahr, J. L., Werbel, J. d., & Bedeian, A. g. (1988). An empirical investigation of self-appraisal-based performance evaluation. Personnel Psychology, 47(1), 141-156.
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., & Greenberg, J. (1985). Procedural justice: An interpretative analysis of personnel systems. In K. Rowland & G. Ferris (Eds.). Research in personnel and human resources management, Vol. 3, (pp. 141-183). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
20. Folger, R., Konovsky, M. A., & Cropanzano, R. (1992). A due process metaphor for performance appraisal. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior: An annual series of analytical essays and critical reviews (Vol. 14, pp. 129-177). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press Inc.
21. Folger, R., & Lewis, D. (1993). Self-appraisal and fairness in evaluations. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: Approaching fairness in human resource management (pp. 107-132). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
22. Greenberg, J. (1986). Determinants of perceived fairness of performance evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 340-342.
23. Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Journal of Management, 16, 399-432.
24. Greenberg, J., Eskew, D. E., & Miles, J. A. (1991). Adherence to participatory norms as a moderator of the fair process effect: When voice does not enhance procedural justice. Paper presented at the meeting of the Academy of Management, Miami, FL.
25. Hauenstein, N. M. A., McGonigle, T., & Flinder, S. (2001). A meta-analysis of the relationship between procedural and distributive justice: Implications for justice research. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 13, 39-57.
26. Hunton, J. E., Hall, T. W., & Price, K. H. (1998). The value of voice in participative decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 788-797.
27. Korsgaard, M. A., & Goodwin, R. (1992). Procedural justice in performance evaluation: The role of voice through self-appraisal. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Montreal.
28. Korsgaard, M. A., & Roberson, L. (1995). Procedural justice in performance evaluation: The role of instrumental and non-instrumental voice in performance appraisal discussions. Journal of Management, 21, 657-669.
29. 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.
30. Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
31. 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.
32. Meyer, H. H. (1991). A solution to the performance appraisal feedback enigma. Academy of Management Executive, 5, 68-76.
33. Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. Thousand Oaks. CA: Sage.
34. Robbins, T. L., Summers, T. P., Miller, J. L., & Hendrix, W. H. (2000). Using the group-value model to explain the role of noninstrumental justice in distinguishing the effects of distributive and procedural justice. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73, 511-518.
35. Roberson, L., Torkel, S., Korsgaard, A., Klein, D., Diddams, J., & Cayer, M. (1993). Self-appraisal and perceptions of the appraisal discussion: A field experiment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14, 129-142.
36. Shapiro, D. L. (1993). Reconciling theoretical differences among procedural justice researchers by re-evaluating what it means to have one's views "considered": Implications for third-party managers. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: Approaching fairness in human resource management (pp. 51-78). Hillsdale. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.
37. Shapiro, D. L. & Brett, J. M. (1993). Comparing three processes underlying judgments of procedural justice: A field study of mediation and arbitration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1167-1177.
38. Taylor, M. S., Tracy, K. B., Renard, M. K., Harrison, J. K., & Carroll, S. J. (1995). Due process in performance appraisal: A quasi-experiment in procedural justice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 495-523.
39. Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
40. Tyler, T. R. (1987). Conditions leading to value-expressive effects in judgments of procedural justice: A test of four models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 333-344.
41. Tyler, T. R., & Bies, R. J. (1990). Beyond formal procedures: The interpersonal context of procedural justice. In J. Carroll (Ed.) Applied social psychology and organizational settings, (pp. 77-99). Hillsdale. NJ: Erlbaum.
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. 115-192). New York: Academic Press.
43. Tyler, T. R., Rasinski, K. A., & Spodick, N. (1985). Influence of voice on satisfaction with leaders: Exploring the meaning of process control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 72-81.
44. 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.
45. van den Bos, K., Lind, E. A., & Wilke, H. A. M. (2001). 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, (pp. 49-66). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
46. 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.