The role of psychological distance in the formation of fairness judgments

Journal of Applied Social Psychology

Volumn 40, Issue 11, 2010, Pages 2888-2903

  Anderson, William D ^a   Patterson, Miles ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI ST LOUIS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 78649425246     PISSN: 00219029     EISSN: 15591816     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00685.x     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Allen, M., Mabry, E., Mattrey, M., Bourhis, J., Titsworth, S., & Burrell, N. (2004). Evaluating the effectiveness of distance learning: A comparison using meta-analysis. Journal of Communication, 54, 402-420.
2. Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2003). Organization structure as a moderator of the relationship between procedural justice, interactional justice, perceived organizational support, and supervisory trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 295-305.
3. Bar-Anan, Y., Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (2006). The association between psychological distance and construal level: Evidence from an Implicit Association Test. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 609-622.
4. Barrett-Howard, E., & Tyler, T. R. (1986). Procedural justice as a criterion in allocation decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 296-304.
5. Bauer, T. N., Truxillo, D. M., & Paronto, M. E. (2004). Applicant reactions to different selection technology: Face-to-face, interactive voice response, and computer-assisted telephone screening interviews. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 12, 135-148.
6. Bies, R. J., & Shapiro, D. L. (1987). Interactional fairness judgments: The influence on procedural fairness judgments. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 676-685.
7. Blumberg, H. H. (1972). Communication of interpersonal evaluations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 23, 157-162.
8. Brockner, J., & Tyler, T R. (1992). The influence of prior commitment to an institution on reactions to perceived unfairness: The higher they are, the harder they fall. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 241-261.
9. Brockner, J., Ya-Ru, C., Mannix, E. A., Leung, K., & Skarlicki, D. P. (2000). Culture and procedural fairness: When the effects of what you do depends on how you do it. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 138-159.
10. DeCremer, D., & Blader, S. L. (2006). Why do people care about procedural fairness? The importance of belongingness in responding and attending to procedures. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 211-228.
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. Groth, M., Goldman, B. M., Gilliland, S. W., & Bies, R. J., (2002). Commitment to legal claiming: Influence of attributions, social guidance, and organizational tenure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 781-788.
13. Henderson, M., Fujita, K., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2006). Transcending the "here": The effect of spatial distance on social judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 845-856.
14. Herbert, B. G., & Vorauer, J. D. (2003). Seeing through the screen: Is evaluative feedback communicated more effectively in face-to-face or computer-mediated exchanges? Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 25-38.
15. Jones, D. A., & Skarlicki, D. P. (2005). The effects of overhearing peers discuss an authority's fairness reputation on reactions to subsequent treatment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 363-372.
16. Klimoski, R., & Inks, L. (1990). Accountability forces in performance appraisal. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 45, 194-208.
17. Kurtzberg, T. R., Naquin, C. E., & Belkin, L. Y. (2005). Electronic performance appraisals: The effects of e-mail communication on peer ratings in actual and simulated environments. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 98, 216-226.
18. Latané, B. (1984). The psychology of social impact. American Psychologist, 36, 343-356.
19. Leary, M. R., Barnes, B. D., Griebel, C., Mason, E., & McCormack, D. (1987). The impact of conjoint threats to social- and self-esteem on evaluation apprehension. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50, 304-311.
20. Leeson, H. V. (2006). The mode effect: A literature review of human and technology issues in computerized testing. International Journal of Testing, 6, 1-24.
21. Liaw, S. S. (2004). Computers and the Internet as a job-assisted tool: Based on the three-tier use model approach. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 399-414.
22. Martins, L. L., Gilson, L. L., & Maynard, M. T. (2004). Virtual teams: What do we know and where do we go from here? Journal of Management, 30, 805-835.
23. Pesendorfer, E. M., & Koeszegi, S. T. (2006). Hot versus cool behavioral styles in electronic negotiations: The impact of communication mode. Group Decision and Negotiation, 15, 141-155.
24. Postmes, T., Spears, R., Sakhel, K., & DeGroot, D. (2001). Social influence in computer-mediated communication: The effects of anonymity on group behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1243-1254.
25. Ramirez, A., Walther, J. B., Burgoon, J. K., & Sunnafrank, M. (2002). Information-seeking strategies, uncertainty, and computer-mediated communication. Human Communication Research, 28, 213-228.
26. Sia, C. L., Tan, B. C., & Wei, K. K. (2002). Group polarization and computer-mediated communication: Effects of communication cues, social presence, and anonymity. Information Systems Research, 13, 70-90.
27. Sinar, E. F., Reynolds, D. H., & Paquet, S. L. (2003). Nothing but net? Corporate image and web-based testing. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11, 150-157.
28. 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.
29. Stuhlmacher, A. F., & Citera, M. (2005). Hostile behavior and profit in virtual negotiation: A meta-analysis. Journal of Business and Psychology, 20, 69-92.
30. Tangirala, S., & Alge, B. J. (2006). Reactions to unfair events in computer-mediated groups: A test of uncertainty management theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100, 1-20.
31. Tanis, M., & Postmes, T. (2003). Social cues and impression formation in CMC. Journal of Communication, 54, 587-605.
32. 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. 115-292). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
33. 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.
34. Van den Bos, K., Lind, E. A., Vermunt, R., & Wilke, H. A. (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.
35. Van den Bos, K., Vermunt, R., & Wilke, H. A. (1997). Procedural and distributive fairness: What is fair depends more on what comes first than what comes next. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 95-104.
36. Van den Bos, K., Wilke, H. A., 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.
37. Van Prooijen, J., Van den Bos, K., & Wilke, H. A. (2004). Group belongingness and procedural justice: Social inclusion and exclusion by peers affects the psychology of voice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 66-79.
38. Walther, J. B., & Bunz, U. (2005). The rules of virtual groups: Trust, liking, and performance in computer-mediated communication. Journal of Communication, 55, 828-846.
39. Watts, S. A. (2007). Evaluative feedback: Perspectives on media effects. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 384-411.
40. Weisband, S. P., Schneider, S. K., & Connolly, T. (1995). Computer-mediated communication and social information: Status salience and status differences. Academy of Management Journal, 4, 1124-1151.
41. Wellens, A. R. (1989, September). Effects of telecommunication media upon information sharing team performance: Some theoretical and empirical observations. IEEE AES Magazine, 13-19.