Beyond procedure's content the role of accessibility experiences and personal uncertainty in procedural justice judgments

Experimental Psychology

Volumn 58, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 341-352

  Greifeneder, Rainer ^a   Müller, Patrick ^b   Stahlberg, Dagmar ^a   Van Den Bos, Kees ^b   Bless, Herbert ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANNHEIM   (Germany)

^b UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Accessibility experiences; Ease of retrieval; Fairness; Justice; Uncertainty

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SELF CONCEPT; SOCIAL JUSTICE; UNCERTAINTY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; FEMALE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MALE; SELF CONCEPT; SOCIAL JUSTICE; UNCERTAINTY;

EID: 80051957031     PISSN: 16183169     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000101     Document Type: Article

References (48)

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, NY: Academic Press.
2. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
3. Ambrose,M. L.,& Kulik, C.T. (2001).Howdo I knowthat's fair?A categorization approach to fairness judgments. In S. W. Gilliland, D. D. Steiner, & D. P. Skarlicki (Eds.), Emerging perspectives on values in organizations (pp. 35-62).Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
4. Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2009). The role of overall justice judgments in organizational justice research: A test of mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 491-500.
5. Chaiken, S., & Trope, Y. (1999). Dual-process theories in social psychology. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
6. Chen, S., & Chaiken, S. (1999). The heuristic-systematic model in its broader context. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual process theories in social psychology (pp. 73-96). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
7. Clore, G. L. (1992). Cognitive phenomenology: Feelings and the construction of judgment. In L. L. Martin & A. Tesser (Eds.), The construction of social judgments (pp. 133-163). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. 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. (Pubitemid 33132714)
9. Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 386-400. (Pubitemid 33403965)
10. Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., & Ng, K. Y. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A metaanalytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 425-445. (Pubitemid 33403969)
11. De Cremer, 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. (Pubitemid 43532516)
12. De Cremer, D., & Sedikides, C. (2005). Self-uncertainty and responsiveness to procedural justice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 157-173. (Pubitemid 40256514)
13. Dijksterhuis, A., Macrae, C. N., & Haddock, G. (1999). When recollective experiences matter: Subjective ease of retrieval and stereotyping. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 760-768.
14. Dykman, B. M. (1998). Integrating cognitive and motivational factors in depression: Initial tests of a goal-orientation approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 139-158. (Pubitemid 128458959)
15. 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.
16. Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (2001). Fairness theory: Justice as accountability. In J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organizational justice (pp. 1-55). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
17. Greenberg, J. (2006). Losing sleep over organizational injustice: Attenuating insomniac reactions to underpayment inequity with supervisory training in interactional justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 58-69. (Pubitemid 43145689)
18. Greifeneder, R., & Bless, H. (2007). Relying on accessible content versus accessibility experiences: The case of processing capacity. Social Cognition, 25, 853-881.
19. Greifeneder, R., & Bless, H. (2008). Depression and reliance on ease-of-retrieval experiences. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 213-230.
20. Greifeneder, R., Bless, H., & Pham, M. T. (2010). When do people rely on affective and cognitive feelings in judgment? A review. Personality and Social Psychology Review. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1177/ 1088868310367640
21. Haddock, G., Rothman, A. J., Reber, R., & Schwarz, N. (1999). Forming judgments of attitude certainty, intensity, and importance: The role of subjective experiences. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 771-782.
22. Hansen, J., & Wänke, M. (2008). It's the difference that counts: Expectancy/experience discrepancy moderates the use of ease of retrieval in attitude judgments. Social Cognition, 26, 447-468.
23. Hogg, M. A. (2005). Uncertainty, social identity, and ideology. In S. R. Thye & E. J. Lawler (Eds.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 22). New York, NY: Elsevier.
24. Kahneman, D., & Miller, D. T. (1986). Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives. Psychological Review, 93, 136-153.
25. Kühnen, U. (2010). Manipulation-checks as manipulation: Another look at the ease-of-retrieval heuristic. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 47-58.
26. Leventhal, G. 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, NY: Plenum Press.
27. Lopes, L. L. (1987). Between hope and fear: The psychology of risk. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 20, pp. 255-295). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
28. McGregor, I., Zanna, M. P., Holmes, J. G., & Spencer, S. J. (2001). Compensatory conviction in the face of personal uncertainty: Going to extremes and being oneself. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 472-488. (Pubitemid 33594883)
29. Mü ller, P., Greifeneder, R., Stahlberg, D., Van den Bos, K., & Bless, H. (2010). Shaping cooperation behavior: The role of accessibility experiences. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 178-187.
30. Robins, R. W., Hendin, H. M., & Trzesniewski, K. H. (2001). Measuring global self-esteem: Construct validation of a single-item measure and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 151-161.
31. Rothman, A. J., & Schwarz, N. (1998). Constructing perceptions of vulnerability: Personal relevance and the use of experiential information in health judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1053-1064.
32. Schmitt, M., Gollwitzer, M., Maes, J., & Arbach, D. (2005). Justice sensitivity: Assessment and location in the personality space. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 21, 202-211. (Pubitemid 41020151)
33. Schwarz, N. (1998). Accessible content and accessibility experiences: The interplay of declarative and experiential information in judgment. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 87-99.
34. Schwarz, N. (2004). Metacognitive experiences in consumer judgment and decision making. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14, 332-348. (Pubitemid 39583451)
35. Schwarz, N., Bless, H., Strack, F., Klumpp, G., Rittenauer-Schatka, H., & Simons, A. (1991). Ease of retrieval as information: Another look at the availability heuristic. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 195-202.
36. Spencer, S. J., Zanna, M. P., & Fong, G. T. (2005). Establishing a causal chain: Why experiments are often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 845-851. (Pubitemid 43083771)
37. Thibaut, J. W., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
38. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207-232.
39. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.
40. Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2003). The group engagement model: Procedural justice, social identity, and cooperative behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 349-361. (Pubitemid 37480189)
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. (Pubitemid 33594902)
42. Van den Bos, K. (2003). On the subjective quality of social justice: The role of affect as information in the psychology of justice judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 482-498.
43. Van den Bos, K., Heuven, E., Burger, E., & Van Veldhuizen, M. F. (2006). Uncertainty management after reorganizations: The ameliorative effect of outcome fairness on job uncertainty. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale, 19, 75-86.
44. 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 (Vol. 34, pp. 1-60). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
45. Van den Bos, K., & Lind, E. A. (2009). The social psychology of fairness and the regulation of personal uncertainty. In R. M. Arkin, K. C. Oleson, & P. J. Carroll (Eds.), Handbook of the uncertain self (pp. 122-141). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
46. 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 (Vol. 2, pp. 49-66). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
47. Wänke, M., Bless, H., & Biller, B. (1996). Subjective experience versus content of information in the construction of attitude judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 1105-1113.
48. Wänke, M., Bohner, G., & Jurkowitsch, A. (1997). There are many reasons to drive a BMW: Does imagined ease of argument generation influence attitudes? Journal of Consumer Research, 24, 170-177.