Two experimental tests of relational models of procedural justice: Non-instrumental voice and authority group membership

British Journal of Social Psychology

Volumn 52, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 361-376

  Platow, Michael J ^a   Eggins, Rachael A ^b   Chattopadhyay, Rachana ^a   Brewer, Greg ^a   Hardwick, Lisa ^a   Milsom, Laurin ^a   Brocklebank, Jacinta ^a   Lalor, Thérèse ^a   Martin, Rowena ^a   Quee, Michelle ^a   Vassallo, Sara ^a   Welsh, Jenny ^a  

^a AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b Workplace Research   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; AUSTRALIA; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; GROUP PROCESS; HUMAN; HUMAN RELATION; MACHIAVELLIANISM; PERCEPTION; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; SOCIAL JUSTICE;

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTITUDE; AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY; GROUP PROCESSES; HUMANS; INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS; MACHIAVELLIANISM; QUESTIONNAIRES; SOCIAL IDENTIFICATION; SOCIAL JUSTICE; SOCIAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 84878641516     PISSN: 01446665     EISSN: 20448309     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.2044-8309.2011.02083.x     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Blader, S. L., Chang, C.-C., & Tyler, T. R. (2001). Procedural justice and retaliation in organizations: Comparing cross-nationally the importance of fair group processes. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 12, 295-311.
2. Cohen, R. L. (1985). Procedural justice and participation. Human Relations, 7, 643-663.
3. de Cremer, D., & Wubben, M. (2010). When does voice have to be more than only listening? Procedural justice effects as a function of confident leadership. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 9, 69-78.
4. Ellemers, N., Doosje, B., & Spears, R. (2004). Sources of respect: The effects of being liked by ingroups and outgroups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 155-172.
5. Foddy, M., Platow, M. J., & Yamagishi, T. (2009). Group-based trust in strangers: The role of stereotypes and group heuristics. Psychological Science, 20, 419-422.
6. Kakar, S. (2000). The time of Kali: Violence between religious groups in India. Social Research, 67, 877-899.
7. Koper, G., van Knippenberg, D., Bouhuijs, F., Vermunt, R., & Wilke, H. (1993). Procedural fairness and self-esteem. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 313-325.
8. Kux, D. (2002). India's fine balance. Foreign Affairs, 81, 93-106.
9. 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.
10. Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The psychology of procedural justice New York : Plenum Press.
11. Peate, V. G., Platow, M. J., & Eggins, R. A. (2008). Collective voice and support for social protest among indigenous and non-indigenous Australians: Considering the role of procedural justice in an intergroup conflict of interest. Australian Journal of Psychology, 60, 175-185.
12. Platow, M. J., Filardo, F., Troselj, L., Grace, D. M., & Ryan, M. K. (2006). Non-instrumental voice and extra-role behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 135-146.
13. Platow, M. J., Grace, D. M., & Smithson, M. J. (2011). Examining the preconditions for psychological group membership: Perceived social interdependence as the outcome of self categorization. Social Psychology and Personality Science Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/1948550611407081
14. Platow, M. J., & OBrien, L. (2009). Distributive and procedural justice: Acceptability as solutions to social dilemmas. In A. Kakanowski & M. Narusevich (Eds.), Handbook of social justice (pp. 103-124). Hauppauge, NY : Nova Science Publishers.
15. Smith, H. J., Tyler, T. R., Huo, Y. J., Ortiz, D. J., & Lind, E. A. (1998). The self-relevant implications of the group-value model: Group membership, self-worth, and treatment quality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 470-493.
16. Ståhl, T., van Prooijen, J.-W., & Vermunt, R. (2004). On the psychology of procedural justice: Reactions to procedures of ingroup vs. outgroup authorities. European Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 173-189.
17. Ståhl, T., Vermunt, R., & Ellemers, N. (2006). Friend or foe? Ingroup identification moderates reactions to outgroup members' allocation behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 877-885.
18. Ståhl, T., Vermunt, R., & Ellemers, N. (2008a). For love or money? How activiation of relational versus instrumental concerns affects reactions to decision-making procedures. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 80-94.
19. Ståhl, T., Vermunt, R., & Ellemers, N. (2008b). Reactions to outgroup authorities' decisions: The role of expected bias, procedural fairness and outcome favourability. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 11, 281-299.
20. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.). The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Monterey, CA : Brooks/Cole.
21. Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis Hillsdale, NJ : Erlbaum.
22. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory Oxford : Blackwell.
23. Tyler, T. R. (1994). Psychological models and the justice motive: Antecedents of distributive and procedural justice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 850-863.
24. Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2000). Cooperation in groups: Procedural justice, social identity, and behavioral engagement Philadelphia, PA : Psychology Press.
25. Tyler, T. R., & Degoey, P. (1995). Collective restraint in social dilemmas: Procedural justice and social identification effects on support for authorities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 482-497.
26. Tyler, T., Degoey, P., & Smith, H. (1996). Understanding why the justice of group procedures matters: A test of the psychological dynamics of the group-value model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 913-930.
27. 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.
28. Tyler, T., Lind, E. A., Ohbuchi, K.-I., Sugawara, I., & Huo, Y. J. (1998). Conflict with outsiders: Disputing within and across cultural boundaries. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 137-146.
29. 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.