Effects of interactional justice on egocentric bias in resource allocation decisions

Journal of Applied Psychology

Volumn 89, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 405-415

  Leung, Kwok ^a   Tong, Kwok Kit ^b   Ho, Salina Siu Ying ^c  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MACAU   (Macao)

^c CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN RELATION; MALE; MANPOWER; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SALARY AND FRINGE BENEFIT; SELF CONCEPT; SOCIAL JUSTICE; THEORETICAL MODEL; UNIVERSITY;

ADULT; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS; MALE; MODELS, THEORETICAL; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SALARIES AND FRINGE BENEFITS; SELF CONCEPT; SOCIAL JUSTICE; UNIVERSITIES;

EID: 2942691844     PISSN: 00219010     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.89.3.405     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Adams, J. S. (1963). Toward an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 422-436.
2. 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.
3. Babcock, L., Loewenstein, G., & Issacharoff, S. (1997). Creating convergence: Debiasing biased litigants. Law and Social Inquiry, 22, 913-925.
4. Bazerman, M. H., & Neale, M. A. (1982). Improving negotiation effectiveness under final offer arbitration: The role of selection and training. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 543-548.
5. Bazerman, M. H., & Neale, M. A. (1992). Negotiating rationality. New York: Free Press.
6. Bies, R., & Moag, J. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. In R. Lewicki, M. Bazerman, & B. Sheppard (Eds.), Research on negotiation in organizations (pp. 43-55). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
7. Brockner, J. (1996). Understanding the interaction between procedural and distributive justice: The role of trust. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 390-413). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8. Camerer, C. F., & Loewenstein, G. (1993). Information, fairness, and efficiency in bargaining. In B. A. Mellers & J. Baron (Eds.), Psychological perspectives on justice: Theory and applications (pp. 155-179). New York: Cambridge University Press.
9. Carroll, J. S., Bazerman, M. H., & Maury, R. (1988). Negotiator cognitions: A descriptive approach to negotiators' understanding of their opponents. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 41, 352-370.
10. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NI: Erlbaum.
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 millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 425-445.
13. Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice? Journal of Social Issues, 31 (3), 137-149.
14. Diekmann, K. A., Samuels, S. M., Ross, L., & Bazerman, M. H. (1997). Self-interest and fairness in problems of resource allocation: Allocators versus recipients. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1061-1074.
15. Edwards, J. R. (2001). Ten difference score myths. Organizational Research Methods, 4, 265-287.
16. Greenberg, J., Bies, R. J., & Eskew, D. E. (1991). Establishing fairness in the eye of the beholder: Managing impressions of organizational justice. In R. A. Giacalone & P. Rosenfeld (Eds.), Applied impression management: How image-making affects managerial decisions (pp. 111-132). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
17. Ito, T. A., Larsen, J. T., Smith, N. K., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1998). Negative information weighs more heavily on the brain: The negativity bias in evaluative categorizations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 887-900.
18. Keppel, G. (1973). Design and analysis: A researcher's handbook. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
19. Lerner, M., Somers, D. G., Reid, D., Chiriboga, D., & Tierney, M. (1991). Adult children as caregivers: Egocentric biases in judgments of sibling contributions. The Gerontologist, 31, 746-755.
20. Leung, K., & Bond, M. B. (1984). The impact of cultural collectivism on reward allocation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 793-804.
21. Leung, K., Chiu, W. H., & Au, Y. F. (1993). Sympathy and support for industrial actions: A justice analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 781-787.
22. Leung, K., Su, S. K., & Morris, M. W. (2001). When is criticism not constructive? The roles of fairness perceptions and dispositional attributions in employee acceptance of critical supervisory feedback. Human Relations, 54, 1155-1187.
23. Ley, R. (1979). F curves have two tails but the F test is a one-tailed two-tailed test. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 10, 207-212.
24. Liebrand, W. B., Messick, D. M., & Wolters, F. J. (1986). Why are we fairer than others: A cross-cultural replication and extension. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 590-604.
25. Lind, E. A. (2001). Fairness heuristic theory: Justice judgments as pivotal cognitions in organizational relations. In J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organization justice (pp. 56-88). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
26. Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum Press.
27. Messick, D. M., & Sentis, K. P. (1979). Fairness and preference. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 15, 418-434.
28. Miceli, M. P. (1993). Justice and pay system satisfaction. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace (pp. 257-283). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
29. Moorman, R. H. (1991). Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 845-855.
30. Morris, M. W., & Larrick, R. P. (1995). When one cause casts doubt on another: A normative analysis of discounting in causal attribution. Psychological Review, 102, 331-355.
31. Morris M. W., & Leung, K. (2000). Justice for all? Progress in research on cultural variation in the psychology of distributive and procedural justice. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 49, 100-132.
32. O'Malley, M. N., & Becker, L. A. (1984). Removing the egocentric bias: The relevance of distress cues to evaluation of fairness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 10, 235-242.
33. Pillutla, M. M., & Mumighan, J. K. (1996). Unfairness, anger, and spite: Emotional rejections of ultimatum offers. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 68, 208-224.
34. Pruitt, D. G., & Rubin, J. Z. (1986). Social conflict: Escalation, stalemate and settlement. New York: Random House.
35. Ross, M., & Sicoly, F. (1979). Egocentric biases in availability and attribution. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 322-336.
36. Thompson, L. L. (1991). Information exchange in negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27, 161-179.
37. Thompson, L. L., & Loewenstein, G. (1992). Egocentric interpretations of fairness and interpersonal conflict. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 51, 176-197.
38. Tyler, T. R., & Bies, R. J. (1990). Interpersonal aspects of procedural justice. In J. S. Carroll (Ed.), Applied social psychology in business settings (pp. 77-98). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
39. Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2000). Cooperation in groups: Procedural justice, social identity, and behavioral engagement. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
40. Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 115-191). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
41. Van den Bos, K. (2001). Uncertainty management: The influence of uncertainty salience on reactions to perceived procedural fairness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 931-941.
42. Van den Bos, K., & Lind, E. A. (2002). Uncertainty management by means of fairness judgments. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 1-60). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
43. 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: From theory to practice (pp. 49-66). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
44. Van den Bos, K., & Miedema, J. (2000). Toward understanding why fairness matters: The influence of mortality salience on reactions to procedural fairness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 355-366.
45. Van den Bos, K., van Schie, E. C. M., & Colenberg, S. E. (2002). Parents' reactions to child day care organizations: The influence of perceptions of procedures and the role of organizations' trustworthiness. Social Justice Research, 15, 53-62.
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.
47. 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.
48. Wade-Benzoni, K. A., Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Bazerman, M. H. (1996). Egocentric interpretations of fairness in asymmetric, environmental social dilemmas: Explaining harvesting behavior and the role of communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 111-126.
49. Walster, E., Walster, G. W., & Berscheid, E. (1978). Equity: Theory and research. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.