Do the means always justify the ends, or do the ends sometimes justify the means? A value protection model of justice reasoning

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

Volumn 28, Issue 5, 2002, Pages 588-597

  Skitka, Linda J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 23044535003     PISSN: 01461672     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0146167202288003     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Adams, J. S. (1963). Toward an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 422-436.
2. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
3. Bobocel, D. R., Son Hing, L. S., Davey, L. M., Stanley, D. J., & Zanna, M. P. (1998). Justice-based opposition to social policies: Is it genuine? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 653-669.
4. Boninger, D. S., Krosnick, J. A., Berent, M. K., & Fabrigar, L. R. (1995). The causes and consequences of attitude importance. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 159-190). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5. Cohen, R. L. (1985). Procedural justice and participation. Human Relations, 38, 643-663.
6. Converse, P. E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent (pp. 201-261). New York: Free Press.
7. Cropanzano, R., & Greenberg, J. (1997). Progress in organizational justice: Tunneling through the maze. In C. Cooper & I. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 317-372). New York: John Wiley.
8. Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1996). Social cognition (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
9. Folger, R., Rosenfeld, D., Grove, J., & Cockran, L. (1979). Effects of "voice" and peer opinions on responses to inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 2253-2261.
10. Greenberg, J. (1990). Looking fair versus being fair: Managing impressions of organizational justice. In B. Staw & L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 12, pp. 111-157). Greenwich, CT:JAI.
11. 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.
12. Gross, S. R., Holtz, R., & Miller, N. (1995). Attitude certainty. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 215-246). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
13. Haney, C. (1991). The fourteenth amendment and symbolic legality: Let them eat due process. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 183-204.
14. Heatherton, T. F., & Polivy, J. (1991). Development and validation of a scale for measuring state self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 1106-1118.
15. Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94, 319-340.
16. Hovland, C. I. (1959). Reconciling conflicting results derived from experimental and survey studies of attitude change. American Psychologist, 14, 8-17.
17. Hyman, H. H., & Sheatsley, P. B. (1947). Some reasons why information campaigns fail. Public Opinion Quarterly, 11, 412-423.
18. James, W. (1948). Psychology. Cleveland, OH: World Publishing. (Original work published 1892)
19. Judd, C. M., & Krosnick, J. A. (1989). The structural bases of consistency among political attitudes: Effects of political expertise and attitude importance. In A. R. Pratkanis, S. J. Breckler, & A. G. Greenwald (Eds.), Attitude structure and function (pp. 99-128). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20. Krosnick, J. A. (1988). The role of attitude importance in social evaluation: A study of policy preferences, presidential candidate evaluations, and voting behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-ogy, 55, 196-210.
21. 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.
22. Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.
23. Locke, E. A. (1991). The motivations sequence, the motivation hub, and the motivation core. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 288-299.
24. Metropolitan Chicago Information Center. (1997). Community demographics and quality of life survey data, 1991-1996. Retrieved in April, 2001 from http://www.mcic.org/info/survey.html
25. Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press.
26. Skitka, L. J., & Mullen, E. (2001). What is fair? The role of personal identity, values, and moral mandates. Manuscript submitted for publication.
27. Steele, C. (1988). The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustaining the integrity of the self. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 21, pp. 261-302). New York: Academic Press.
28. Taylor, S. E. (1989). Positive illusions: Creative self-deception and the healthy mind. New York: Basic Books.
29. Tetlock, P. E., Kristel, O. V., Elson, S. B., & Lerner, J. S. (2000). The psychology of the unthinkable: Taboo trade-offs, forbidden base rates, and heretical counterfactuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 853-870.
30. Thibaut, J., & Walker, J. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
31. Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 595-629). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
32. Van den Bos, K., Bruins, J., Wilke, H.A.M., & Dronkert, E. (1999). Sometimes unfair procedures have nice aspects: On the psychology of the fair process effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 324-336.
33. 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.
34. 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 what comes next. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 95-104.
35. 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 & Social Psychology, 74, 1493-1503.
36. Walster, E., Berscheid, E., & Walster, G. W. (1973). New directions in equity research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25, 151-176.